Method and apparatus for browsing using alternative linkbases

ABSTRACT

Systems and methods for navigating hypermedia using multiple coordinated input/output device sets. Disclosed systems and methods allow a user and/or an author to control what resources are presented on which device sets (whether they are integrated or not), and provide for coordinating browsing activities to enable such a user interface to be employed across multiple independent systems. Disclosed systems and methods also support new and enriched aspects and applications of hypermedia browsing and related business activities.

This application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No.60/379,635, filed May 10, 2002, U.S. Provisional Application No.60/408,605, filed Sep. 6, 2002, and U.S. Provisional Application No.60/455,433, filed Mar. 17, 2003, all of which are incorporated herein byreference.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention is directed generally to interactive televisionand similar interactive hypermedia such as from television or Internetsources, and more particularly to the provision and use of userinterfaces that permit interaction using multiple coordinated devicesets.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

While “convergence” of television (TV) and computer technology have beena major focus of innovation and commercial development since the early1990s, particularly in the area of “interactive television” (ITV), thereremains a huge gulf in the nature of the user experience of ITV and ofcomputer-based media such as the World Wide Web. Convergence has takenhold in infrastructure technologies, with digital and computer-based TV(DTV) editing, production, distribution, transmission, and devices. Atheart ITV is a matter of hypermedia browsing, the process of browsinglinked media resources like the Web, differing only on its emphasis onvideo as the central medium.

However, there remains a divide relating to the dramatic difference inhow TV-centric and computer-centric media are used, and to the culturaldivide between the TV production and distribution industry and thecomputer and Web industries that has prevented a convergence in userexperience from developing or even being seen as possible and desirable.TV usage and directions are focused on its character as a lean-back,across-the-room, low resolution, and relatively passive, relaxedexperience of couch potatoes viewing large, often shared TV screens withsimple remote controls. PC usage and directions are focused on itscharacter as lean-forward, up-close, high resolution, and intensive,highly interactive experiences of individuals with PC-styles displays,keyboards, and pointing devices. Variant device sets and applications,such as PDAs, tablets, and video games, could be taken as suggestive ofthe desirability of selecting among alternative usage modes and formfactors, but only very limited aspects of these suggestions have beenrecognized.

The limitations of these radically disparate device set form factorshave severely limited the appeal of ITV. ITV promises to greatly enrichthe TV experience by allowing interactive features that can range fromaccess to supplementary enhancement material such as background onprograms, casts and players, sports statistics, polls, chat messaging,and interactive advertisements and purchase offers (“t-commerce”), andall manner of other tangential information, to ways to vary the coreprogram content by acting on viewer input and choices as to cameraangles or even alternative plots, as well as providing improved controlof the core experience with electronic program guides (EPGs), personalvideo recorders (PVRs) and video on demand (VOD) and similar features.

The problem is that these interactive features are not well served bythe TV usage mode and form factor, and their use interferes with thebasic TV experience. Rich interaction with a TV is inherently difficult.Presentation of information is limited by the poor capabilities of a TVscreen for presenting text, menus, and navigations controls, and thecrude input capabilities of a remote control. The rich information andnavigation functionality available on a Web browser or other PC-baseduser interface (e.g., UI, especially graphical user interfaces, GUIs)must be “dumbed-down” and limited for use on a TV, and even use ofhigh-definition TV (HDTV) may not significantly ease that—people do notlike to read or do fine work from across-the-room, it is just notcomfortable ergonomics. Furthermore, the attempt to show interactivecontrols and enhancements on the TV interferes with viewing by theperson interacting, as well as any other viewers in the room.Compounding these issues and slowing recognition of better solutions isthe dominance of the cable TV industry, its struggles in developing anddeploying the advanced set-top boxes (STBs) needed to offer meaningfulITV services of the form it envisions, and its orientation to closed,proprietary systems that do not fully exploit or adapt to advances inthe PC and Internet world.

The computer community has attempted to market PCs that include a TVtuner to support TV function in a PC-centric model, as promoted by thePC-DTV Consortium. However, these systems suffer from the converseproblem, in that their form factors are not suited to the fact that mostpeople do not want to watch TV at a PC, with its lean-forward, up-closeform factor. Furthermore, such devices cannot effectively receiveprotected cable or satellite programming. And here, as with conventionalTVs, the use of a single system forces technical, economical, and usageconstraints on the inherently complex, multi-tasking, man-machinebehavior that is desired in a rich hypermedia browsing experience.

There has also been some recognition that PCs provide a way around thelimited installed base of advanced STBs, but this is generally perceivedonly as a limited stopgap. So called Enhanced TV or Extended TV or“telewebbing” has emerged to exploit the fact that tens of millions ofhouseholds have PCs in the same room as their TVs, and can surf relatedcontent on the Web while watching TV. Some broadcasters such as ABC andPBS have exploited this to offer Web content synchronized to a TVprogram; but it is the user who must coordinate the use of the PC withthe TV, by finding the appropriate Web site. In spite of the fact thatthe installed base for such open hardware is some ten times that ofITV-capable set-top boxes, the ITV community generally views such“two-box” solutions as an unfortunate and awkward stopgap that may bedesirably supplanted by advanced “one-box” systems whose wide deploymentmust be awaited. Some major reasons for this lack of acceptance are thatthis simplistic two-box model supports only very limited, pre-definedsynchronization of the availability of TV and enhancement content thatis built into a rigidly fixed two-box structure at the content source,and, even more importantly, that it completely fails to address anycoordination of user activity at the two separate boxes.

Across all of this, the key elements that are lacking are provision of abroadly flexible, powerful, selective, and simple user interfaceparadigm for browsing hypermedia across multiple device sets, whetherthey are integrated or not, with related methods for user and/orauthoring control of such a UI, and provision of an effective method forindependent systems to coordinate browsing activities to enable such auser interface to be employed across multiple independent systems.Further lacking across all of these aspects is delivery of theseservices in a way that provides the user with a smoothly integratedexperience in which interactions on the multiple systems are coupled ordecoupled to the degree appropriate to the task of the moment.

SUMMARY OF VARIOUS EMBODIMENTS THE INVENTION

According to embodiments of the present invention there are providedsystems and methods for navigating hypermedia using multiple coordinatedinput/output device sets. Embodiments of the invention allow a userand/or an author to control what resources are presented on which devicesets (whether they are integrated or not), and provide for coordinatingbrowsing activities to enable such a user interface to be employedacross multiple independent systems. Embodiments of the inventionsupport new and enriched aspects and applications of hypermedia browsingand related business activities.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Further aspects of the instant invention will be more readilyappreciated upon review of the detailed description of the preferredembodiments included below when taken in conjunction with theaccompanying drawings, of which:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary assemblage of user systems,networks, and remote services for implementing certain embodiments ofthe present invention.

FIGS. 2 a and 2 b are a set of block diagrams of exemplary groupings ofdevice sets and systems in the assemblage of FIG. 1.

FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a number of exemplary user interfacedisplay layouts according to certain embodiments of the presentinvention.

FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary structure for stateinformation relating to systems within the assemblage of FIG. 1,relating to the coordination of a multimachine user interface accordingto certain embodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary process, performed by thesystems of FIG. 1, for transferring state data according to certainembodiments of the present invention.

FIG. 6 is a flow chart of an exemplary process, performed by the systemsof FIG. 1, for transferring state data according to certain embodimentsof the present invention.

FIGS. 7 a, 7 b, and 7 c are a set of block diagrams of exemplaryalternative communication configurations in the assemblage of FIG. 1.

FIG. 8 is a block diagram of details of an exemplary portal facilitatingsession coordination linkage in the assemblage of FIG. 1.

FIG. 9 is a schematic diagram portraying exemplary further detail of auser interface for a cross-program portal.

FIG. 10 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary LiberatedSTBconfiguration.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION Overview

The present invention may be described, in various embodiments, as asystem and method for navigating hypermedia using multiple coordinatedinput/output device sets. It provides a broadly flexible, powerful,selective, and simple user interface paradigm for browsing that allowsthe user (and/or an author) to control what resources are presented onwhich device sets (whether they are integrated or not), and provides aneffective method for coordinating browsing activities to enable such auser interface to be employed across multiple independent systems.

One aspect is, in the spirit of human-centered design, to anticipate andbe responsive to the user's desires (and the author's suggestions) as towhat resources to present where, in order to make the best possible useof the hardware resources at a user's disposal. Homes, offices, andother personal environments of the future will have a rich array ofcomputer-based input output devices of various kinds, some generalpurpose, and some more or less dedicated to specific uses. The desire isto minimize constraints on what system resources can be used for a giventask, to enable the most powerful browsing experience possible. Browsingof hypermedia, such as in the case of ITV is a task in which the use ofmultiple devices might be valuable because it may be expected to be adominant activity, if supported effectively, and because of thedisparity of UI issues between watching extended video segments anddoing intensive interactions (such as with Web media) that may be moreor less closely coupled with such video segments.

Prior work has generally not recognized that it is inherent in rich ITVand similar forms of video-centric hypermedia browsing to be best servedas “two-box,” multitasking experiences, at least much of the time, andthe problem is not to squeeze it into one box (and fight over whichbox's functionality and form factor is better), but to enable effectivecoordination of both boxes. While the TV vendors and the PC vendorsmight fervently wish to offer a single system that meets the needs ofITV users, that is not an effective solution. If one assumes that anideal level of coordination among device sets can be enabled andexplores usage scenarios, it can then be seen that different modes ofviewing are best served by different device set form factors. Thesemodes are not fixed for the duration of a session or task, but canblend, overlap, and vary as the flow of a set of linked tasks changes.What begins as a TV-centric browsing (or pure viewing) experience mayshift to casual use of a PC for light interaction (such as looking atmenus and options or doing a quick lookup) to intensive PC-centricactivity (and then back again). The user may shift focus from the TV toboth, to primarily the PC for a time, then become involved in the TVagain. Conversely, an user at a PC may shift to immersion in a TVprogram or movie, then return to intensive use of the PC. While somebroad usage patterns tend to favor video on the lean-back TV device setand interactivity on the lean-forward PC-type device set, other issuesmay relate to incidental viewing of video from a PC centric phase ofactivity, and casual interactions with enhancements in a TV-centricexperience, as well as a complex mix of secondary issues, such asquality-of-service factors, whether an alternative device set is at handand ready for use, other activities, presence of other people,location/setting, mood, and the like.

The point in a session at which a user may wish to shift device sets maydepend not only on the immediate task, but the user's expectation ofwhere that task is leading, so an intensive task soon to end may notwarrant a shift from TV to PC, but a less intensive task leading todeeper interaction may warrant an early shift. Varying form factors ofdifferent TV devices and of the range of PCs, PDAs, tablets, andInternet appliances may also affect what tasks a user wants to do onwhat device, with what UI. At the same time, to avoid burdening the userwith the complications of too much flexibility and too many choices, itmay be desirable that both the user and the content author be able topre-set affinities, preferences, and recommendations, relating to tasktypes, content types, and device availabilities, that couldautomatically place elements on the device set or device set group thatis presumably best suited to the apparent context, while leaving theuser with the ability to recognize that expected targeting (based onconventions and/or unobtrusive cues) and to accept it with no furtheraction, or override it if desired.

Providing the desired flexibility can be viewed in terms of threeinterrelated issues, one of structuring an effective and flexiblemultimachine user interface (MMUI) for browsing by a user, one ofproviding methods (such as markup) for the resourcecreator/author/producer to aid in exploiting that MMUI, and one ofimplementing such an interface on a wide range of hardware and software,including systems for which such usage may not be a primary mission(including both new systems and legacy systems).

A general approach to a MMUI for browsing that provides both usercontrol and authoring support may advantageously build on the concept oftargets for presentation of linked resources already present inhypermedia formats such as HTML (and XLink). In HTML, the link targetattribute can be used to specify which of multiple frames a linkedresource is to be presented in, with options that include the currentframe, another existing frame, or a new frame. Coded specificationswithin the link are typically set by authors/producers of content, andcontrols in the browser allow the user to override and alter thesesettings, such as (with MICROSOFT Internet Explorer, MSIE) by using ashift-click combination to indicate that a link should be opened in anew window. Extending this to an MMUI can be done by expanding thecoding of target attributes and by adding new browser control options,such as control-click, to target a window on an alternate device set.Additional control can be achieved by extending the richer drop-downcontrol that is invoked in MSIE by right-clicking on a link. Thatdrop-down list can be extended to list windows on alternate device sets.This provides a very flexible, general, and simple way to shift activityfrom one device set to another. Similar controls can be provided onsimpler devices, such as for example, with a TV remote control, insteadof select to activate a link to an enhancement overlay on the TV, acombination such as exit-select could be used to activate that link toan associated PC, or a new control button could be provided. As withcurrent browsers, variations on such controls can also be defined toopen the current resource at a second location (cloning).

To implement such an interface on multiple independent device sets, theending system must be given information to inform it when a link is tobe activated, to what resource, with what browser attributes, and withwhat context information. A basic method is to transfer from thestarting system to the ending system a link activation message that thatincludes a state record and contains relevant link arc information. Thestate record contains essential information on the state of the browserand related activities on the starting system that can be used at theending system to configure its browser and related context accordingly.A state exporter/importer/tracker component may be provided as anaddition to a standard browser to provide these functions (withexporter/importer function being sufficient for simple applications).

In simple embodiments, export from the starting system and import at theending system need be done only once per transfer of locus. In certainembodiments, full event synchronization can be maintained, when desired,by the state tracker to provide ongoing collaborative functionality, aswell. This is useful in the case of multiple users, and also can beuseful for a single user that desires the ability to use both devicesets in a fully replicated mode. However an advantage of the proposedmethod over conventional collaboration and synchronization systems, isthat such ongoing event synchronization is not needed for basic MMUIbrowsing by a single user, and the complications and overhead ofcontinually logging, exporting and importing all events that may alterstate can be avoided. Instead, state information need be assembled fortransfer only when a transfer is actually invoked, and only at thenecessary granularity. This simple, occasional, coarse-grained transferis readily added to any browser of existing architecture, unlike morefine-grained full synchronization approaches, which require eitherexcessive tracking activity, display replication approaches, orrearchitecting of browsing to use model-view-controller architectures,such as in event replication approaches.

Another key benefit of this method is that it is readily applied toheterogeneous systems with only simple addition of an exporter/importerand some new UI functions to each system's own native browser. Thisexploits the fact that the underlying resources being browsed can becommon to all systems, and that at a high level, browsing state isrelatively independent of system architecture. Thus the method isreadily applied to both TV and PC-based systems, and could be added toexisting or new systems by manufacturers, integrators, distributors,service providers, or by end users themselves. The proposed methods arewell suited to standardization, which could facilitate the inherentcapability of the methods described here to allow any suitablyfunctional device sets and systems to be used together in the desiredcoordinated fashion, regardless of its internal software and hardwarearchitecture, vendor, or provisioning. Use of XML, RDF, and relatedstandards is suggested to facilitate this. These features for ad hocprovisioning and use of devices acquired for other purposes removes amajor hurdle to the introduction of MMUIs for ITV and other hypermediabrowsing applications. Thus, for example, a household need not buy alean forward device for ITV, but can simply use an existing PC, PDA,tablet, or the like.

As a further perspective on the range of ways to use a MMUI forinteractive TV and similar hypermedia browsing as described herein itmay be helpful, perhaps with regard to varied levels of multitasking and(correspondingly) of how closely enhancement resources relate to theviewing of a “primary program”, to consider the term “interactivity.”The term “interactive TV” might tend to suggest that a viewer interactswith a TV device and/or with TV content. Such a view may be appropriateto many kinds of ITV interaction. However, in considering theembodiments of MMUI browsing described herein, it is noted that manycases of what might be broadly described in terms of “interactive TV”could involve interactions that need not directly involve the TV device,or even the actual program content that is “on the TV”, but that, forinstance, involve other content perhaps more or less closely related tothe program content that is on the TV.

From such a standpoint, the term “coactivity” might be considered asuseful to emphasize the possible distinction between what is interactedwith and what is on TV. Thus, for example, in the case of a looselycoupled interactive sub-task on a PC that relates to a program on theTV, the interactivity that takes place as part of that sub-task might bedescribed as “coactivity”.

The concept of coactivity could be useful, for instance, in clarifyingcertain motivations for using a MMUI. To the extent that one might thinkof a task as “interacting with the TV,” the idea of using another deviceset (for example, a PC) might seem odd and unnatural to the task.However, by recognizing that many interactive tasks actually involvecoactivity with content that might not be “on the TV”, but that relatesto what is on the TV, the use of a separate device set might be morereadily recognized as possibly being natural and appropriate.Accordingly, “two-box” embodiments of the present invention could beseen as potentially well suited to the essential nature of ITV andsimilar hypermedia browsing, and not as a “stopgap” or “work-around”embodiments. Development of this new paradigm for man-machine-mediainteraction affords enriched capabilities and supports new and enrichedapplications.

As used herein, the term “hypermedia” is meant to refer to any kind ofmedia that may have the effect of a non-linear structure of associatedelements represented as a network of information-containing nodesinterconnected by relational links. Hypermedia is meant to include“hypertext”, and the two may at times be used synonymously in the broadsense, but where stated or otherwise clear in context, “hypertext” canrefer particularly to text content, and “hypermedia” to extend that tocontent that includes other formats such as graphics, video, and sound.The terminology used herein is meant of be generally consistent withthat used in World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) recommendations.

The associations of elements may be specified as “hyperlinks” or“links,” such as described by the XLink (XML Linking Language), SMIL(Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language), HTML, XHTML, and similarW3C recommendations. Links define an association between a “startingresource,” the source from which link traversal is begun, and an “endingresource,” the destination, collectively referred to as “participatingresources.” A “resource” is used to refer to any addressable unit ofinformation or service and may at times refer to a resource portionrather than a whole resource, and a “content resource” to refer to anyresource suited to presentation to a user. In the context of hypermedia,“node” may be used synonymously with resource. “Navigation” is meant torefer to the process of following or “traversing” links. Unlessspecifically indicated as “link navigation” or otherwise clear incontext, navigation also is meant to include the control of presentationwithin a resource, such as scrolling, panning, and zooming, usingVCR-like controls to play a continuous media resource, and the like.Addresses for Internet resources are typically in the form of UniversalResource Locators (URLs) or Universal Resource Names (URNs) or otherUniversal Resource Identifiers (URIs), but may be based on any othersuitable addressing mechanism. Hypermedia resources may contain content(also referred to as mediadata) and metadata (including hyperlinks),aspects of a resource may be declarative (such as markup) or procedural(such as embedded logic or program code elements) and may includeembedded resources.

Links may have information about how to traverse a pair of resources,including direction and application behavior information, called an“arc,” and such information may include link “elements” having“attributes” that take on “values.” Behavior attributes include “show”to specify how to handle the current state of the presentation at thetime the link is activated, “external” to specify whether the link is tobe opened in the current application, or an external application, suchas one suited to a special media type, “activate” or “actuate” tospecify whether the link is triggered by some event, typically userinteraction, or automatically traversed when its time span is active,and “target” to specify either the existing display environment in whichthe link should be opened (e.g., a SMIL region, an HTML frame or anothernamed window), or trigger the creation of a new display environment withthe given name. It should be noted that the term target is sometimesalso used in the art to refer to an ending resource as the target of alink, as for a “target resource” or “target page.”

Links may be contained in the starting or ending resource, “outbound” or“inbound” respectively, or may be independently stored as “third-party”arcs. Standard HTML links are typically outbound, but inbound andthird-party link arcs may be useful, such as for adding links that areexternal to read-only or third-party content. By providing suchexternal, third-party links, resources not originally intended to beused as hypermedia can be made into hypermedia. Third-party links may becollected in “linkbases.” Linkbases may be directly associated withtheir starting resources by a resource that leads to both the startingresource and the linkbase, referred to herein as “coupled” linkbases,such as a set of image map links in a Web page that has an embeddedimage link, or may be “decoupled” and obtained by other means.

Where so indicated or clear in context, the term hypermedia may also beused to include “hypermedia-like” resources and systems that do not usecoded links as such, but which support functionally similar non-linearresource relationships using other more or less similar mechanisms, suchas special coding and logic that implements structures such as menustructures that have a defined graph structure, transaction requestforms that have an associated address or other process identifier fortransaction submission, and selectable content elements having a definedrelationship to other resources or actions. This is meant to include anyscheme that associates defined resource anchors or triggers withcorresponding actions. Use of VCR-like or audio recorder-like controlsto add non-linearity to a linear medium (e.g., fast forward/reverse, andskip ahead), also referred to as “trick-play” functionality, is alsoconsidered as hypermedia-like.

According to embodiments of the invention, links may refer to specificportions of a node or resource, such a by an “anchor” that associatesthe link to a position in text (such as in a HTML “A element”), or an“area” or “region” that associates the link to a spatial portion of anobject's visual display, or to non-spatial portions, such as temporalsubparts that may be defined by “begin” and “end” attributes, alsoreferred to as “time positions” or together as a “time scope” or“time-span.” Similar facilities are provided by XPointer, which supportsaddressing into the internal structures of XML documents, and providesan “origin” function to enable addressing relative to third-party andinbound links. Unless otherwise indicated or clear in context, “anchor”may used herein to be synonymous with similar forms, such as origin and“area.”

Hypermedia structures may also be understood in graph-theoretic terms,and modeled as a directed graph, consisting of a set of abstract“nodes,” the resources, joined by directional “edges,” the hyperlinks.In this usage, a linkbase defines a directed graph.

As used herein, and consistent with the Dexter Hypertext ReferenceModel, a “hypermedia system” allows users to create, manipulate, and/orexamine hypermedia, and consists of a “run-time layer” that providestools for accessing, viewing, navigating, and manipulating hypermedia, a“storage layer” that models the basic node/link or resource/link networkstructure of the hypermedia, and a “within component layer” thataddresses the structure of components or resources of various giventypes. The storage layer, as used herein, includes media that may bestreamed directly from a media capture device, such as a camera,microphone, or other sensor, and may not actually be stored. “Streaming”as used herein, unless otherwise indicated or clear from context, refersto this process of transmitting a resource representation, whether ornot the resource is stored or not, and the representation may be in aformat suited to storage, or one specifically suited to streaming.Streaming may also refer more particularly to realtime streaming, inwhich the flow of the stream is managed, such as through bufferingand/or network quality of service controls, to support realtimepresentation of continuous media at a steady rate with limitedinterruptions and without need for pre-downloading of an entire resourcebefore presentation begins. A data stream may itself contain multipledata streams, including both continuous media streams and other kinds ofdata or resources, including discrete resources, metadata, and the like.Depending on the particular embodiment, streams may contain channels, orchannels may contain streams. Linkbases associated with streamed mediamay also take the form of continuous metadata streams, whether embeddedwith the mediadata stream or as an independent stream.

As used herein, a “browser” or “media browser” is meant to include anykind of presentation system capable of presenting media, and is usedsynonymously with “user agent” as a process within a device that rendersthe presentation data for a resource into physical effects that can beperceived and interacted with by the user. A “hypermedia browser”includes browsers that support hypermedia, including standard Webbrowsers, SMIL players, interactive television presentation systems(including self-contained advanced TVs and TVs with set-top boxes), andthe like, and specialized applications capable of presenting hypermedia,including word processors, multimedia and video editors, virtual realitypresentation systems, game players, and the like. “Player” or “viewer”may be used as synonymous with browser, and use of any media typedescriptor as an adjective with “browser” refers to a browser capable ofthat media type. Thus any conventional TV set is included as a “browser”or a “TV browser,” and music players and radios are also included asbrowsers unless otherwise indicated or clear in context. Cases wherehypermedia functions are not used are referred to as “linear” or“simple” presentation, viewing, or listening. “Media player” is used torefer to all such players collectively. Similarly, “browsing” is used torefer to any kind of viewing or playing experience, inclusive ofhypermedia browsing and simple or linear viewing (such as watching TV),unless otherwise indicated or clear in context.

Web browsers are commonly limited to read-only use, except perhaps inuse of forms, but other hypermedia systems are not so limited, and asused herein, unless otherwise stated, such as by the term “pure browser”or clear in context, “browser” is meant to include systems capable ofresource creation and editing as well, including sound and videoediting. Key functions of a browser include, but need not be limited to,providing access to resources, presentation of resources to the user andnavigation of hyperlinks under user control or as directed by thehypermedia resources and links.

“Presentation” is meant to include any means of making a resourcesensible to a human user, including visual display and audio, as well asany other sensible presentation such as used in current and futurevirtual or augmented reality systems affecting the sight, sound, touch,haptic, smell, taste, motion sensing, heat sensing, neural or otherphysiological interface, and the like. In addition to such “output,”presentation also includes recognizing and responding appropriately touser “input” and/or “signals” of any kind that may be provided for,including keyboard, character recognition, touchpad, pointing device,haptic, microphone/speech, and camera, as well as more exotic inputssuch as gesture, body movement, brain wave/electroencephalogram, neuralor other physiological interface, and the like.

“Media format” or, synonymously, “resource format,” as used hereinrefers to the format of a resource as retained, or potentially retained,as when streamed; in the storage layer and accessed by the browser,including access from local storage, via communications from a remotestorage location or server or as streamed from storage or a live capturesource. “Presentation format” refers to the format as rendered orotherwise processed by a browser or equivalent viewer or player orpresentation system for actual presentation to a human user in sensibleform.

Hypermedia linking systems can provide for starting and ending resourcesto be specified that not only present media content resources, but alsothat can specify arbitrary software programs or actions. In current Webtechnology, for example, such generality of function can be achieved byspecifying the URL of a Web service, such as one called using SOAP orother forms of transactions or procedure calls, such as using CommonGateway Interface (CGI). Arbitrarily rich control of such actions can beachieved by passing parameters to ending resources from startingresources, as modified by browsers or other software. Unless indicatedotherwise or clear from context, the term “Web service” as used hereinmay refer loosely to any service accessed via the Web, as well as moreparticularly to Web services based on SOAP and XML and relatedstandards, or on similar architectures. The more particular use of theterm relates to interprogram communications and integrationarchitectures involving programmatic interfaces. Such programmaticinterfaces are generally not suited to direct use by a user with only asimple browser, and generally rely on other applications to provide anyneeded user interface. This is in contrast to the looser usage relatingto services delivered over the Web that are intended for direct use by auser with a browser, and which typically define a browser-based userinterface that is to be rendered based on HTML and/or similarfacilities. The narrower meaning may be referred to herein as“interprogram Web services” or as “Web services based on SOAP,” orsimilar phrasing, and such reference to SOAP is meant to be inclusive ofrelated and/or equivalent protocols unless indicated otherwise.

“Hypermedia system” as used herein refers broadly to all system elementscomprising such a system, including the hardware, software,communications, and storage, including portions at a user location,portions at server/peer locations providing content and processingservices, potentially including the entire Internet or any similarnetwork to the extent that those elements are usable with a hypermediapresentation system and the resources that may be accessible to it.“User system” refers to the portions local to or controlled by anindividual user or a group of users of a shared presentation system.“Server” or “server system” refers to any system, whether hardware orsoftware, providing auxiliary services that may be supportive of a usersystem. “Remote servers” include content servers or repositories,application servers that may perform information processing, searching,e-commerce, or other transaction or support services remote from theuser, including TV and video servers, audio servers, other storageservers, including storage area networks (SANs), network addressablestorage (NAS), game servers, virtual reality servers, cable andsatellite TV and ITV head-end systems, network servers such as proxiesand caching servers, and the like. “Head-end server” is meant to beinclusive of other remote servers that may be reached via the head-end,regardless of actual location or function. “Local servers” includeanalogous services that may be local to the user, including mediaservers, gateways, controllers, PCs, hubs, storage servers, storage areanetworks, DVRs (also referred to a PVRs). Peer systems may also provideservices in “peer-to-peer” (P2P) systems, and unless otherwise indicatedor clear in context, the term server is meant to include peers acting inservice provider roles.

“User” as used herein refers to any human end-user of a system, and mayinclude users of a shared system. Users may be private consumers orworkers in an organization or enterprise. User and “viewer” may be usedsynonymously. Depending on context, “subscriber” may refer to a user ofa subscription service or more loosely to any user. “User interactionsession” or “user session” as used herein refers to a series ofinteractions with a hypermedia system by a user, especially a serieshaving a degree of continuity and relationship in time and with regardto an activity workflow or series of workflows, including concurrentworkflows that may be related by a multitasking user. Depending oncontext, and the details of particular embodiments, a user may be adistinct individual (an “individual user”) and/or a grouping ofassociated individual users of a device set, such as a family orhousehold or work-group (a “collective user”).

According to embodiments of the invention, a user session may becomposed of one or more “browser sessions,” and well as other“application sessions” with other applications. The relationship of suchsessions with each other within a user session may vary with differentembodiments and with the settings and circumstances. For example, withenhancements to a TV-centric browsing experience, it might normally beappropriate that the base TV program and the related enhancement sessionbe considered as “linked sessions” or sub-sessions that are distinctfrom one another, so that a browser session transfer is understood totransfer the enhancement session, but not the base TV session. The terms“transfer” and “migrate” are used synonymously to refer to the movementof the locus of work of a session, such as from one system or device setto another. The term “clone” is used to refer to a transfer thatduplicates the current resource presentation of a session at a seconddevice set. A migration that deactivates the session at the originaldevice set is referred to as a “complete migration” or “terminalmigration.”

A user session may be local to the user system or may involve one ormore “communications sessions” with remote server or peer systems, wheresuch communications sessions may be defined in accord with acommunications protocol. A user session may be composed of multiple“client/server sessions” (or “peer sessions” or “client/server/peersessions”, or collectively “remote sessions”), including concurrent suchsessions. A “server session” refers to a series of activities performedby a server in support of a series of client/server service requests(and similarly for a “peer session” and “remote session”). Except whereindicated otherwise or clear from context, references to peer-to-peerand client/server are meant to be inclusive of one another. Someprotocols, such as HTTP for example, may be sessionless (based onrequest-response sets only), so that a remote HTTP communicationssession may strictly speaking be composed of multiple separatecommunications interchanges at the protocol level that are related bythe server into a single server session, and this can be thought of asconstituting a single virtual communications session. Unless otherwisestated or clear from context, communications session is meant to includesuch virtual sessions.

“Shared sessions” or “multi-user sessions” are applicable to multi-usersystems where users cooperate or collaborate in controlling aninteractive session, are recognized as individuals, and retain theirindividual identity and state.

“State” refers to the representation of the current state of a systemrelating to one or more tasks or sessions, usually in discrete values ofsome set of “state variables” that can be stored as a “state record”sufficient to define the state fully enough to allow the currentactivity to be deactivated and then reactivated, such as in a contextswitch or shutdown, using the state record to reset it so that it thenbehaves as if never interrupted.

“Session state” refers to the state of a user session, for a browsersession typically including, depending on the granularity desired, aselection of such state variables as the user identity and relatedauthentication information (including for example password andcertificate information), the identification of active hypermediaresources and details of how they are currently rendered (such as windowsizes and locations, and scrolling state), link arc data for any linkcurrently being traversed, the execution state of embedded logiccomponents such as Java applets (including the state of a Java VirtualMachine, JVM), ActiveX controls, Javascript (or ECMAScript, or Jscript,or other scripts), or FLASH, or other plug-ins, or helper applications,or the like, navigation path history (the ordered list of resources backand forward from the current resource, corresponding those activated bythe back and forward browsing controls, as well as, optionally, next andprevious with regard to tree branches), selected interaction history,variable user preferences, status of communications and server/peersessions (including addresses, ports, identities, and authenticationinformation), and other current context regarding other internal andexternal resources, including such information as may be stored incookies. Any or all of such information may be stored in a “staterecord.” State records may include details of user interactions not yetsaved in the storage layer, including edits and forms field inputs notyet submitted. State may also include data on link arcs, includingtrigger data, and on resources, if such data must be transferred toestablish state in a coordination embodiment in which such informationcannot be obtained directly by the coordinated system. Sessions,software processes, and the like that are characterized by statevariables are referred to as “stateful” and those that are not, as“stateless.”

“Software process state” refers to the program environment state of asoftware process as it runs on a system. A process typically runs withthe support of an operating system, and its state typically includes thecurrent values of the instruction counter, registers, dynamic memory,input/output activities, and open or assigned operating system, network,and hardware resources, as well as active sessions with externalsystems, and is used synonymously with “task,” as an operating systemconcept that refers to the combination of a program being executed andbookkeeping information used by the operating system. Note however that“task” is more commonly used herein to refer to tasks at the user and/orsession level. A software process is meant to include any of applicationsoftware, middleware, and system software, and the case of a purehardware, firmware, or dedicated implementation is also meant to beincluded in this usage.

A “process instance” refers to a single process with its associatedstate information. It may be possible to run multiple browser processinstances on a single computer, sharing some system resources, such ascaches, persistent storage, network access, and the like, in common, andthus having some state elements in common. Depending on implementation,a browser instance may allow for multiple presentation windows to beopen, each presenting a different resource (and, as for example in MSIE,each supported by a separate process thread within one browser process).In such cases, depending on context, browser state may refer to theentire set of state information for all active browsers or theinformation for one browser instance (also referred to as one browser),for all its active windows. The term “current state” may be used todenote more limited state information on the single window, or singlebrowser instance that is currently in focus for user interaction.

“Context” may be used as generally synonymous with state in referring tothe information needed to allow a session to be interrupted, moved,copied, restarted, or otherwise shifted without apparent loss of contextbeyond the intended change. Context may also be used to refer to broaderaspects of state that go beyond and are external to the state of theapplication, hardware, software, and network, to include the user, bothin regard to his session, and potentially to the broader situation andenvironment of the session, including aspects that may be sensed orinferred. This broad usage of context is defined (by Dey in “AConceptual Framework and a Toolkit for Supporting the Rapid Prototypingof Context-Aware Applications”) as: “any information that can be used tocharacterize the situation of entities (i.e. whether a person, place orobject) that are considered relevant to the interaction between a userand an application, including the user and the application themselves.Context is typically the location, identity and state of people, groupsand computational and physical objects.” “Context-aware applications”refer to those that exploit this broader class of external knowledge of“where,” “what,” “when,”, “who,” and “why,” and that may involve theinterplay of situational awareness and informational relevancy. As usedherein, this broader use of context and context-awareness is meant toinclude all aspects of the user's state, including the user's attention.This includes the methods of attentive user interfaces (AUIs), andvariations, including those referred to as attentional, attention-based,or awareness systems, which sense and draw inferences from cues to userattention; including such factors as presence, proximity, orientation,speech, activity, and/or gaze, which may be sensed using microphones,cameras, tactile sensors, object sensors, eye trackers, accelerometers,global positioning systems, and the like.

“Client/server state” refers to the aspects of state relevant to aclient/server session between a client system and a local or remoteserver system that provides it with resources or other services. “Serverstate” refers to those portions of client/server state maintained at aserver, and “client state” to those maintained at a client (andsimilarly for “peer-to-peer” sessions). “Transaction” is meant tobroadly include any discrete activity, but with emphasis on activitiessuch as database inquiry, search, and update, which may or may notrelate to business transactions, especially those that involveclient/server (or peer) interaction and that may involve multipleprocessing, database update, and intermediate interaction steps.

“Granularity” of state refers to the level of detail captured as stateand thus determines the number and kind of discrete points at which iscan be saved and restored without loss of context or need for the userto re-establish lost context details. Examples of varied granularityinclude the relatively coarse grain of browsing link traversals, theintermediate level of user interactions for editing, data entry, andmanipulation of controls and the like, and the very fine grain ofinternal software process state. The later is of lesser concern for muchof the present work, so that the granularity of user input, which is“relatively fine” in comparison to link traversals, may also be referredto herein as “fine grained.”

“Interactive Television” (ITV) as used herein is meant to refer to anycombination of video with displayable supplementary information and/orcontrol elements that invite or aid in user interaction, includingEnhanced TV (ETV) (or Extended TV), Synchronized TV (SyncTV), andsimilar services, and all forms of hypermedia containing a significantvideo component. This may broadly include the full range from“TV-centric” media in which the video program is expected to be the coreexperience in which interactive enhancements and features serve ascomplements, to “PC-centric” or “Web-centric” media in whichcomputer-based media such as Web pages are the core experience and videoserves as an enhancement or offshoot to that, but as may be stated orclear in context, ITV may be used to suggest TV-centric media. It isalso meant to include specialized or more limited forms of interactivitywith TV, including video on demand (VOD), near video on demand (NVOD),subscription video on demand (SVOD), pay-per-view (PPV), Enhanced (orInteractive) Program Guides (EPG/IPG), Digital Video Recorders (DVRs,also known as Personal Video Recorders, PVRs), Multi-camera angle orIndividualized TV. Included are closed services such as “walled gardens”or “virtual channels” or ITV portals, and open services such as thosebased on Internet resources. More advanced forms of ITV include “viewerparticipation” capabilities, in which view interactions may result inchanges to the program seen by other viewers, such as in polls or votingto select winners in contests, or even to alter the plot of a story(“interactive storytelling”.) ITV includes systems using TV industrystandards, such as ATVEF (Advanced Television Enhancement Forum) and therelated DASE (Digital TV Applications Software Environment) and DDE(Declarative Data Essence), OCAP (Open Cable Application Platform),JavaTV, DVB-MHP (Digital Video Broadcast-Multimedia Home Platform),DAVIC (Digital Audio Visual Council), ATM Forum, Interactive ServicesArchitecture, or similar standard or proprietary systems (including forexample ACTV/HyperTV, WORLDGATE, WINK, WebTV, and VEON, and the like),as well as Internet and Web standards, such as for example SMIL(Synchronized Multimedia Integration Language), MHEG (Multimedia andHypermedia information coding Expert Group) and HyTime(Hypermedia/Time-based Structuring Language, ISO/IEC standard), and thelike.

As used herein in reference to content resources, unless indicatedotherwise or clear in context, “television” may be used as broadlyinclusive of any video content or resource, including all forms of TVdistribution, as well as movies, however distributed, live or recordedvideo, animations, 3DVR, or any other continuous visual media oraudio/visual combinations.

Reference to “identity” of a “TV program” or for a radio program orother hypermedia resource external to the Web or an equivalentlystructured storage layer is meant to refer to resource identificationinformation for any such resource, and identity of a “current” programmay be limited to the channel (or equivalent) or may use a globallyunique channel identifier, but may also include time-positioninformation, such as a fixed time position from the start of a givensegment, or a current position in real-time play, which may be specifiedin terms of a fixed position and a real time at which play begins fromthat position. “Identity,” “program identifier” and “resourceidentifier” are used broadly to include any identifying information,including specific names or addresses or other unique program resourceidentifiers, including titles, naming codes, URIs, URNs, URLs and thelike, Digital Object Identifiers (DOIs), MPEG-21 Digital ItemIdentifiers, TV Anytime Content Reference Identifiers (CRIDs),ISO/SMPTE/ATSC International Standard Audiovisual Number (ISAN) andVersioned-ISAN (V-ISAN), Universal Program Identifiers (UPIDs), SMPTEUnique Media Identifiers (UMIDs), NIELSEN Automated Measurement ofLineups (AMOL or AMOL I) and AMOL II, and relative identifiers,including time and channel identifiers, and other metadata typesdescribed below. Such systems may distinguish between identificationsused to logically reference a resource, and locators used to actuallyretrieve the resource, possibly involving a resolution process and/orservice to convert such identifiers to locators, and possibly supportingmultiple alternative locations, and may apply to editorial or medialevels. Such identification systems may or may not distinguish multipleinstances of a program, such as in repeated broadcasts, or variantversions of programs, such as with regard to edits, updates, languages,format, and the like. Such systems may also retain a relative identifiersuch as time and channel in association with a stored form of theresource, such as to be usable even after a broadcast.

The term “program” is meant to be used as broadly inclusive of anycomplete identifiable video (or audio or other media) segment orgrouping of segments, including conventional broadcast orcable/satellite TV programs that may be identified by name or by channeland start time or other identifiers, as well as such alternatives as VODor streamed programs from TV distribution industry or Internet sources,stored programs on cassette, CD, DVD, DVR, hard disk, or other storagemedia or systems, and ad hoc programs such as might be obtained from acamera (or microphone) or computer-based image (or sound) generationsource (such as 3DVR). Program is also meant to refer to advertisements,as just another class of program segment. The distinction between aprogram as a single resource and an interactive hypermedia experience ascomposed of multiple resources viewed in flexible, linked and/orassembled combinations may depend on the context for cases where aprogram may involve some customization and/or personalization andvariability in such aspects as multiple camera angles, sound tracks,short or long forms, composition from multiple components, and the like,and similarly as to whether advertisements are included or excluded aspart of their surrounding programming. Program as used herein may besynonymous with ATSC terminology of a “television program” or “event.”The terms “primary program,” “core program,” and “base program” may beused to refer to a program that serves as a starting resource forenhancements. As may be indicated or clear from context, those terms mayalso be used to distinguish a program, sometimes referred to as a“content program,” from advertisements that may be presented inassociation with that program, such as before, between, or aftersegments of that program.

As used herein, “channel” may include any relevant form of channel. Thismay include “physical channels,” which may correspond to radiofrequencies or other physical locators, “virtual channels,” such as usedin digital television systems, such as in the ATSC PSIP protocol, todecouple programming to be identified by users from the physicalchannels that might carry them, as specified with mapping tables forexample, and “logical channels,” which may include virtual channels orany other groupings of channels that may be useful as logical groupings.Virtual channels may have a multidimensional structure, such as the ATSCPSIP scheme of major and minor channels that provide a two dimensionalnavigation structure, and in which the major channels may have abranding significance.

As used herein, “user interface” (UI) refers to all aspects offacilitating man-machine interaction, including the hardware andsoftware input/output (I/O) devices, and the control paradigms, models,and metaphors that exist in the user's mental model of the interaction,the real physical world, and the virtual world presented to the user asa shared conceptual medium that links the real, the mental, and theinternal model of this world represented in the machine. “Graphical userinterfaces” (GUIs) are widely used to facilitate user understanding andto implement virtual controls (“widgets”) that may metaphoricallyrepresent physical controls (such as a virtual button image on ascreen). Less capable devices may be limited to simpler UIs based onmenus and simple buttons. Multimachine user interfaces (MMUIs) refer toUIs that are capable of presentation on multiple machines havinginput/output devices and processors that are physically independent.This corresponds to the idea of systems, originally used with regard todata processing servers, that could be used independently, but in whichsoftware and network connections are used to give the effect to the userof a “single system image”. Unless otherwise indicated or clear incontext, MMUI is also used as a superset that is inclusive of thesimpler cases of UIs that support multiple input/output devices drivenby a single processor, including simple cases of multiple monitors, andof standard single machine UIs, and “full MMUI” or “true MMUI” or“independent MMUI” may be used to refer specifically to aspects orimplementations that involve independent systems, and “multidevice userinterface” (MDUI) may be used to more properly describe the broader,more inclusive use of MMUI. “Single machine user interface” (SMUI) maybe used to refer to the case where no provision is made for a MMUI.“Machine” and “system” are used synonymously. Further clarification theusage of the term “independent” is provided in the discussion below

As used herein, “presentation device set” or “device set” refers to theinput/output devices managed by a system as a related set for combineduse as an access mechanism suite to support a user interaction sessionat a locus of work. Typically, independent systems have independentdevice sets. “Locus of work” refers to the spatial proximity of devicesin a device set as related to the user, which can be thought of the“working set” of devices for a task, and device set and locus of workare used as roughly synonymous. “Lean forward” device sets refer todevices designed for intensive interaction and use in close proximity toa user, for “close work,” such as PC devices, including displaymonitors, keyboards, mice, touchscreens, and the like. “Lean back”device sets refer to devices suited to use at a distance, or“across-the-a room,” such as TVs or music systems, and directlyassociated input devices, such as remote controls.

In this usage, the locus of work for a device relates more to theperceived locus of its effect than its actual location, so, for examplethe locus of work for a remote control or wireless keyboard used tointeract with a distant TV is primarily across-the-room, with the TV (asa projection of action to the TV), but secondarily in the user's hand. Ascreen is typically the dominating device, and other members of itsdevice set will ordinarily have the same primary locus of work. Formusic systems, this locus is more diffuse, and the device set includesthe speakers, the control devices, and microphones, if used. Similarly,voice input, gestures, or the like may have an ambiguous associationwith device sets. Specific commands or scoping conventions may be usedto selectively direct voice commands (and similar ambiguous inputs) tospecific device sets, systems and application components. “Physicallocus of work” refers to the actual device sets and form factors as justdescribed, while “logical locus of work” is meant to refer to thecontext of a session, and especially the presentation features, such asnavigation position and essential aspects of resource presentation thata user could reasonably expect to be invariant after a well-effectedtransfer of physical locus.

As used herein, “coordinated” systems or device sets are those that areoperated as an ensemble, in a coupled manner using the methods of thekind described herein or other similar methods. Such coordination orcoupling may range from tight to loose, as described herein, and tightcoordination may include synchronization. Coordinated devices sets mayor may not be controlled by independent systems. Device sets that arerecognized as being available for coordinated use at any given time arereferred to collectively as a “device set group” or simply a “devicegroup.” As used herein the term “collocated” is meant to refer todevices that are in local proximity, whether packaged together orseparated by a distance that might be linked by direct cabling and/orlocal network communications, typically within meters or tens of metersand typically within a single building. With regard to coordination ofmultiple device sets, collocation refers to proximity such that theycould be used with reasonable effectiveness by a single user as one ormore concurrently active and coordinated loci of work, or used bycollaborating users who are within direct sight and/or sound of oneanother.

Except where indicated otherwise or clear in context, terminology usedherein is meant to be generally consistent with that used (with respectto the Web) in Device Independence Principles (W3C Working Draft 18 Sep.2001), and specifically including the terms listed in its glossary, andwith that used in the W3C Multimodal Interaction Working Group Charter(Feb. 1, 2002), and in Multimodal Requirements for Voice MarkupLanguages (W3C Working Draft 10 Jul. 2000). A notable area of variationfrom W3C convention is that, except where indicated otherwise or clearin context, “mode” is used herein as inclusive of differences withrespect to work style modes and device set usage modes, such aslean-back versus lean-forward, which primarily relate to form-factor, aswell as of differences with respect to sensory mode, especially speech,such as text (with image and pointing) versus voice (as supported byvoice recognition or text-to-speech). The former are referred to hereinas “homologous modes” and the latter as “heterologous modes.” W3C usageof “multimodal” is specific to multiple heterologous modes, where onemode is a speech mode, and one is non-speech. Also in variation fromW3C, “coordinated” as used herein includes cases of sequentialcoordination of device sets over the course of a user session, such asby session transfer, which W3C usage could refer to as uncoordinatedusing their definition of coordinated as being interpreted together(with regard to heterologous multimodal inputs or outputs). Thatnarrower usage is referred to herein as “coordinated interpretation” or“synchronized coordination.” “Personalization” is meant to include anyprocess for user control of how resources are presented or used, bothbefore the fact and at the time, including controls at a server or proxyat an application or adaptation level or in the browser or otherassociated user agent components, including selection of profiles thatmay be created by others. “Customization” is meant to includepersonalization as well as similar processes and controls that may bespecified by an author/producer. However, consistent with common usage,“personalization” may also be used as synonymous with “customization,”unless otherwise indicated or clear from context.

“Form factor” as used herein is used to broadly characterize theergonomic or human factors aspects of size, shape, and configuration ofa system and its input/output device set, primarily with regard tohardware characteristics unless otherwise indicated. “Adaptation” of apresentation refers to changes associated with different form factors ofthe device sets used. “Basic adaptation” refers to changes inherent inthe form factor, including changes in display resolution and colordepth, as well as the related issues of input devices relating tokeyboards and pointing devices. “Rich adaptation” refers to substantivechanges in the nature of the user interface such as use of menus, icons,text, and controls suited to high or low resolution display and varyingabilities to enter text and control complex widgets such as drop downlists (but still with regard to homologous modes). “Heterologousadaptation” refers to the still richer adaptation to differingheterologous modes, such as speech.

“Author” is used to refer to any or all of the original author orcreator of a resource, and editor or producer or programmer, or systemoperator, or other participant in the resource creation and distributionprocess (including advertisers, advertising agencies, and sponsors, inthe case of resources which involve such parties), and thus inclusive ofboth content creators and content providers. As will be clear fromcontext, “programmer” may be used to relate to TV content programs or tosoftware code programs. Compound forms, such as “author/producer” orsimilar combinations, are meant to be synonymous with this inclusive useof author, and not to exclude unnamed roles unless otherwise indicatedor clear from context. “Operator” or “system operator” or “serviceoperator” is meant to refer broadly to operators of a TV distributionsystem, including Multiple System Operators (MSOs), TV networks, localbroadcast stations, cable and satellite TV operators, as well asoperators of Internet-based or other new channels of distribution (suchas streaming media services), and of physical media distributionchannels (such as CD and DVD). Author is also meant to be inclusive ofboth “human authors,” including any human editing processes, and“automated authors,” including dynamic content management/deliverysystems, software agents, association, filtering, and annotationsystems, and the like.

Notwithstanding the distinctions made herein among TV, PC and otherclasses of user systems (such as listed below) that relate to suchissues as the type of media they are oriented to present and toseparations of reception, control, and storage functions, it should beunderstood that such distinctions are not inherent or essential to themethods described, and will gradually dissolve as these productscontinue to converge. These distinctions are used to address current andnear-term product configurations, and not to imply restrictions in theapplicability of the methods described. Thus for example, TV and PC, TVand STB, TV and DVR, and similar currently disparate configurationsshould be understood to be synonymous with regard to future fullyconverged products.

“Television system” (TV) or simply “television” as used herein refers toa system for presenting video, whether from a transmitted or storedresource, and unless stated or otherwise clear from context includesreception and control components such as typically contained in a TV“receiver,” as well as advanced control, reception, and storagefunctions which may be separately contained in a “set-top box” (STB)(but not necessarily including advanced media gateway and serverfunctions that may be packaged together with a set-top box). Televisionsystems may also be componentized, such as comprising a separate monitorand a receiver and/or control unit. Also included are associated inputdevices, such as remote controls, and storage devices such as VCRs(Video Cassette Recorders) and DVRs. “TV-like” or “TV-type” are used torefer broadly to all systems having a predominant function of playingvideo. Unless otherwise indicated or clear from context, set-top box orSTB is used both to refer to a separate set-top box unit, and to includethe equivalent functions (control, signal management and conversion,intelligence, and the like) that may be integrated into an advanced TVsystem or receiver, as well as possible future configurations that maycombine STB functions with a gateway or other system or that maydistribute such functions into multiple units to control multiple TVreceivers or monitors or other display systems. In this broad sense, STBand TV may be used interchangeably. Also, as noted above, whiletelevision and other video may be described herein as primary examplesof embodiments of the present invention, similar methods may beapplicable to audio, music, radio, or other media and associated mediaplayers. All such audio and/or video systems (“AV” or “A/V”) may beloosely referred to as “entertainment” devices, appliances, or systems,and such products may also be loosely referred to as “consumerelectronics” (CE) products.

“Computer system” or simply “computer” when used herein in the contextof a user system, refers to any kind of intelligent system usedpredominantly as a general purpose intelligent device capable of running“application programs” for various purposes. A variety of conventionaldistinctions may be used to categorize computers as to functionalcapability and form factor, such as, for example, those listed in thenext paragraph, but such categorization should be understood to befuzzy, and likely to evolve over time as capabilities change, improve,and converge (both within the computer category, and between computersand televisions and other entertainment/media devices) and usagepatterns co-evolve. “Computer-like” or “computer-type” are used toemphasize inclusion of all such systems and exclusion of systems wherecomputer function is absent or predominantly subordinate to televisionfunctions. User systems that do not predominantly function asgeneral-purpose computers may nonetheless contain “embedded computers”to provide supporting intelligence, such as for example, in mediaplayers or other entertainment devices.

Personal computer” (PC) may be used to refer broadly to any computer forpersonal or individual use, but as will be clear in context, usuallysuggests a desktop or laptop/notebook (or sub-notebook) form factor thatprovides for a high-function, high-resolution user interface. “PersonalDigital Assistant” (PDA) refers to a wide range of handheld and portabledevices that provide PC-like capabilities in a reduced size and weightform factor, typically with small screens and no keyboard. “Tablet” mayrefer to a complete system that provides an intermediate form factor,with a screen, and a touchpad or stylus interface and possibly includinga compact keyboard, but can also refer to a similar device that servesas terminal to a base system. Additional computer-like systems areInternet appliances, perhaps taking the form of “webpad” tablet devices,and wireless phones and pagers, which are gradually converging withPDAs.

It should be understood that advanced TV/entertainment device remotecontrols may include display screens and stylus or touchscreen entrythat is comparable to a PDA in form factor, and that PDAs typically haveinfrared communications and may be used with software that can enablethem to serve as TV/entertainment remote controls. “Dedicated” is usedto refer to devices are designed to work with a specific class ofassociated devices, especially those with a specific architecture, andwhich may generally be expected to be “provisioned” together, and“non-dedicated” or “open” to those designed for flexible use andinterfacing to a wide variety of system types and architectures. Suchdedicated devices may commonly also be “limited function” devices,lacking the “general-purpose,” open programmability typical of a PC orPDA, a capability that allows for an open-ended range of applications.As a result, dedicated devices may be limited in utility and unable toachieve the economies of scale and breadth of function of more flexibleplatforms. “Universal” may be used to refer to the very partial step ofa device such as a “universal remote control” that is designed for usewith a limited class of associated devices (in this case TVs and otherentertainment devices) from any of multiple vendors, but which lacksbroader function (in this case use as an independent PDA).

As used herein, the term “continuous media” is meant of refer to anyrepresentation of “content” elements that have an intrinsic duration,that continue (or extend) and may change over time, including one ormore of “audio data,” “video data,” animation, virtual reality data,hybrid natural and synthetic video data, including both “stored formats”and “streams” or streaming transmission formats, and further including“continuous hypermedia” which contain both simple continuous media andhyperlinks. Continuous media may contain descriptive metadata, timecodes (such as in Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers,SMPTE, or European Broadcasting Union, EBU, coding), and other metadata.Resources that are not continuous, and have no temporal dimensionalityare referred to as “discrete.” Continuous media is also inclusive of“time-based documents” as used in the HyTime standard to refer todocuments with scheduled presentation. “Time code” is meant to includespecific time code values embedded in the video, such as SMPTE/EBU, orother signal data that can map to exact time positions, as well asexternal measures of time position that may or may not be exact,including for example such timing systems as are used in SMIL, and MIDI.

“Video data” refers to all forms of moving-images, with or withoutaccompanying sound, including analog and digitally coded video,television, Internet television or IPTV or IP video, film, animation,virtual reality data, hybrid natural and synthetic video data, and thelike. Video image data is most commonly represented as a series of stillimages, whether in analog or digitally coded forms, including ATSC(American Television Systems Committee), NTSC (National TelevisionSystems Committee), PAL (Phase Alternate Line)/SECAM (Sequential Couleuravec Memoire), DTV (Digital TV), HDTV (High Definition TV), EDTV(Enhanced Definition TV), SDTV (Standard Definition TV), MPEG (MPEG-1,MPEG-2, and MPEG-4, and supplemented by MPEG-7 and MPEG-21, and otherstandards), DVB (Digital Video Broadcasting), InternationalTelecommunications Union H.26x and H.32x, RTP (Real-Time TransportProtocol), RTSP (Real Time Streaming Protocol), SMIL (SynchronizedMultimedia Integration Language), ISMA (Internet Streaming MediaAlliance), QUICKTIME, WINDOWS MEDIA, and REALMEDIA, and the like, butmay also be coded as object data, including formats provided for inMPEG-4.

“Audio data” refers to all stored forms of sound, whether part of avideo form or not, including analog and digitally coded sound or musicor other audio information in formats such as PCM (Pulse CodeModulation), CD-AUDIO, MP3, REALAUDIO, MIDI (Musical Instrument DigitalInterface), and the like. Audio data is most commonly represented asamplitude data over time, whether in analog or digitally coded form,although object data representations can also be used, such as usingMIDI.

Animation or virtual reality data is commonly represented in variousimage-like forms, raster or vector graphic forms, or as object-basedstructures, such as scene graphs, including SHOCKWAVE FLASH (includingSWF and Open SWF), SVG (Scalable Vector Graphics), VRML (Virtual RealityModeling Language), RM3D (Rich Media 3D), X3D (eXstensible 3D), andMPEG-4/BIFS (Binary Format for Scenes), Computer Aided Design (CAD) orwireframe animation, and the like. Unless otherwise indicated or clearfrom context, “virtual reality” is meant to be inclusive of augmentedreality.

Another media content type is still images, including photographs,drawings, cartoons, diagrams and facsimiles, which may be coded in suchformats as JPEG (Joint Photographic Experts Group)/JFIF (JPEG FileInterchange Format), GIF (Graphic Interchange Format), TIFF (TaggedImage File Format), PTP (Picture Transfer Protocol), including objectformats such as CAD and the other object formats listed above, and thelike.

A further common media content type is text, which may be coded in suchformats as ASCII (American Standard Code for Information Interchange),HTML (Hypertext Markup Language), DHTML (Dynamic HTML), XHTML(eXtensible HTML), PDF (Portable Document Format), SGML (StructuredGeneralized Markup Language), Postscript, word processing formats, andthe like. Other media content includes active formats, such asspreadsheets, for example.

“Media content” (or “media”) is used herein to refer generally to anycontent, or information that is understandable to humans. “Content”refers to any form of transmitted or stored information. “Objects,” whenused in the context of stored content objects refers to any content itemor element or grouping of items or elements, including objects within afile, and objects stored as files or sets of files. When used in thecontext of object-based media formats, the term is meant herein to beused in accordance with the definitions applicable to such formats. Itwill also be understood that in the context of software systemarchitectures, “object” refers to object-oriented software design,modeling, and programming, in which all relevant entities are structuredas objects, computation is performed by objects communicating with oneanother by passing messages that request actions and convey anyarguments or parameters that characterize that action, and objects havememory and are instances of classes which serve as repositories forbehaviors associated with objects and which are organized into a classhierarchy.

“Storage” as used herein is meant to refer to the process of storinginformation or content for future use, or to any memory, “storagedevice” or “storage system.” “Storage system” refers to any device orany combination of one or more devices with software that supports theuse of storage, including SANs and NAS. “Storage device” refers to theelement or elements of a storage system that include actual fixed orremovable “storage media” capable of retaining content in anelectromagnetic or other machine-readable form using any technology,including electronic, magnetic, optical, time-delay, molecular, atomic,quantum, transmission-delay and the like, including all future storagetechnologies.

“Transmission” as used herein is meant to refer to any form of“communication” or “transport,” including connections to directlyattached devices, local area networks (LANs) including home and officenetworks, and wide area networks (WANs). Transmission may be over anysuitable medium, including the Internet and World Wide Web, cable andwireline networks, including DSL (Digital Subscriber Loop) telephonic,Hybrid Fiber/Coax (HFC), powerline or others, ATM (Asynchronous TransferMode) networks, fiber-optic networks including use of SONET (SynchronousOptical Network) and DWDM (Dense Wavelength Division Multiplexing),satellite and terrestrial fixed and mobile wireless networks, includingbroadcast, direct-to-home (DTH) satellite or DBS (Direct BroadcastSatellite), cellular, 3G (3rd Generation), future 4G or NextGeneration,UMTS (Universal Mobile Telecommunications System), LMDS (LocalMultipoint Distribution Services), MMDS (Multipoint MicrowaveDistribution System), and wireless LANs (WLANs) such as IEEE 802 series(802.11a, 802.11b, 802.11g, 802.16) wireless Ethernet or Wi-Fi networks,ETSI HiperLAN, and other wired or wireless LANs and HANs (Home AreaNetworks) and PANs (Personal Area Networks) or WPANs, includingBluetooth, HomeRF, infrared (including IrDA, Infrared Data Association),powerline, including HomePlug (HomePlug Powerline Alliance) and X10,phoneline, including HomePNA (Home Phoneline Networking Alliance), andvariations based on Software Defined Radio (SDR) and spread spectrummethods, as well as ad-hoc networks. Unless otherwise indicated or clearfrom context, LAN, HAN, and PAN (and their wireless variants) are meantto be substantially equivalent and inclusive on one another.

Transmission includes direct (point-to-point) wired paths, includingspecial purpose local connections using proprietary or standard physicaland signaling methods, including audio/visual (A/V) connections such asbaseband video, channel 3/4 ATSC RF, RF bypass, S video, S-Link,baseband audio, and SP/DIF digital audio, cable connections, twistedpair, Digital Visual Interface (DVI), High-Definition MultimediaInterface (HDMI), Universal Serial Bus (USB), IEEE 1394 Fire-wire, andthe like, as well as wireless equivalents such as wireless 1394 andinfrared. Unless otherwise indicated or clear from context, transmissionis meant to include physical transport of storage media. Transmissioninvolves both a logical path, which is meant to refer to higher-levelprotocol and routing considerations, and a physical path, which relatesto the lower level of the specific wired or wireless media signalingpaths used. Transmission may be one-way, such as broadcast, or two-way.Two-way cable television networks may provide for a return channel thatis in-band or out-of-band, or may use telephone lines and modems toachieve similar return connectivity, thus supporting push or pullactivity.

Transmission or network protocols may include IP (Internet Protocol,including IPv4 and IPv6), TCP (Transmission Control Protocol), UDP (UserDatagram Protocol), SCTP (Stream Control Transmission Protocol), RTP,RTCP (RTP Control Protocol), RSTP, IP Multicast, ASF (Advanced StreamingFormat), HTTP (Hypertext Transfer Protocol) and the secure variantHTTPS, UHTTP (Unidirectional HTTP), Internet Relay Chat (IRC), ShortMessage Service (SMS), Multimedia Messaging Service (MMS), Simple MailTransfer Protocol (SMTP), Jabber, Wireless Village, proprietary instantmessaging networks such as Yahoo!, Microsoft Network (MSN), ICQ, and AOLInstant Messenger, NetMeeting, T.120, WAP (Wireless ApplicationsProtocol), ATM, Ethernet, GSM (Global System for Mobile Communications)and similar wireless protocols, cable TV and Hybrid Fiber/Coaxprotocols, DOCSIS (Data Over Cable Service Interface Specification),DSM-CC (Digital Storage Media—Command and Control), DMIF (DeliveryMultimedia Integration Framework), and many other current and futureprotocols, and may use baseband or broadband signaling. In multi-nodenetworks, transmission may be directed to a network node address,examples of which are IP addresses, STB or cable drop or satellitereceiver node addresses, and logical addresses, such as URLs andURIs/URNs.

“The Internet” is meant to include both the current embodiment of theInternet with its current suite of protocols, services, nodes, andfacilities, and future extensions (with extended protocols, services,nodes, and facilities) as an open, public internetwork that links andsubsumes all networks that are not intentionally isolated frominternetworking, including a multinetwork that uses an adaptation layerto bridge networks having diverse protocols. Unless otherwise indicatedor clear from context, the Internet is meant to be inclusive of othernetworks or sub-networks using similar technologies or providing similarservices, including intranets or extranets or ad-hoc networkassemblages. “Internet” may also be used in various contexts to refer tonetwork elements, such as those that use Internet protocols and/orconnect to Internet facilities, and/or to other attributes relating tothe Internet. In distinguishing Internet paths and/or connections fromnon-Internet paths and/or connections, the terms “public Internet”and/or “open Internet” are meant to refer to the open connectivity ofthe Internet. This open connectivity may be understood as being providedif a path provides connectivity to the full Internet on at least oneside, and permits connectivity of any Internet node on one side to anyInternet node on the other side, given the use of appropriate protocolsby the nodes and their mutual willingness to communicate with oneanother. As used herein, a single physical path might carry logicalpaths that may include logical paths that are open, public Internetpaths, and other logical paths that are closed and/or proprietary andthat might use non-Internet protocols, such as for example, in the caseof a cable TV HFC network path that carries both closed cable TVchannels and open DOCSIS Internet service. Similarly an open, publicInternet path might include segments that use non-Internet protocols,but that provide open, public Internet connectivity by encapsulationand/or translation and/or other methods that make the non-Internetsegment transparent to open, public Internet traffic that may be passedover that segment. It is noted that on an Internet path that isinherently open, the effect of a closed subnetwork can be created amonga defined set of nodes by using various methods to effect a “virtualprivate network” (VPN), such as for purposes of security, possibly inconjunction with use of gateways, routers, and/or firewalls, or similarnetwork nodes, and that, unless otherwise indicated or clear fromcontext, references herein to open, public Internet paths are meant toinclude paths that may in fact be used with restriction by such means.

“Metadata” refers to data about data, including descriptors of datacontent and of data format and “program information.” Metadata formatsinclude XML (eXtensible Markup Language), RDF (Resource DescriptionFramework), SDP (Session Description Protocol), SAP (SessionAnnouncement Protocol), MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions),MPEG-7, MPEG-21 (including Digital Item Declaration, Digital ItemIdentification and Description, Content Handling and Usage, IntellectualProperty Management and Protection, Terminals and Networks/Digital ItemAdaptation, Content Representation, and Event Reporting), SMPTE UniqueMedia Identifiers (UMIDs), SMPTE/EBU time codes, QUICKSCAN addresses,MPEG-2 Program Specific Information (PSI), ATSC-PSIP (ATSC-ProgramService Integration Protocol), DVB-SI (Digital Video Broadcast-ServiceInformation), and SMIL, as well as data contained in Electronic ProgramGuides (EPGs) and media asset management systems such as may be used inhome media server/repository systems. Metadata also includes markup,such as that used to define the presentation and handling of content,including link arc data, and markup is a coding method that can be usedto express metadata. Unless otherwise indicated or clear from context,reference to XML is also meant to include use of the expanding suite oftools for working with XML including XLink, XPointer (XML PointerLanguage), XPath (XML Path Language), XSL (Extensible StylesheetLanguage), XSLT (XSL Transformations), Namespaces, Document Object Model(DOM), XML Information Set, XML Fragments, Canonical XML, and XMLSchemas and DTDs (Document Type Definitions), XML Query, and ongoingenhancements to these tools and standards, as documented by the W3C, aswell as other tools related to that work. Metadata can also include theprogram identification information described above, and metadata may beembedded within the content itself, and/or in associated portions of adistribution format, such as in VBI or in digital structures, or may beassociated by reference.

“Multicast” as used herein is meant to refer to the transmission of datato a defined group of recipients. Internet multicast protocols, such assupported by the Internet Multicast Backbone (MBone) and IP Multicast,provide for this in the form of a stream or channel to which recipientsmay subscribe. “Broadcast” is meant to apply broadly to any form ofdistribution intended to go simultaneously to many recipients(one-to-all, one-to-many), including conventional TV and radioterrestrial broadcast, cable and satellite, distribution, and the like.Unless otherwise indicated or clear from context, broadcast is alsomeant to include other forms of simultaneous distribution, whether truebroadcast (one-to-all) or equivalents, such as realtime Internetstreaming, whether using multicasting (one-to-many), or simultaneousunicast via multiple direct individual (one-to-one) sessions.

It should be noted that “synchronization” is used in two differentsenses, which will be clear from context. One relates to synchronizationof usage activities among device sets, as a high degree of coordination,such that events at one device set are fully replicated at another forsome continuing period. The other usage relates to synchronization ofresource presentation, where the originating resource of a link istime-bounded, so that a link is enabled at the start of that intervaland disabled at the end, such as is often desired in ITV, wherepresentation of video resources and associated enhancements are intendedto be synchronized, so that an enhancement appears at the same time as acorresponding video segment. The latter usage may refer to any of arange of degrees of synchronization, including tight “frame-accurate”cases and very loose cases. Further terminology related to timing ofenhancements is suggested by Behrens, Prototypes, Field Tryouts ProceedFor Enhanced TV in Current, Jul. 17, 2000, and usage herein is meant tobe generally consistent with that:

“Synchronous enhancements that are transmitted for use at specific timesin a program.” (This may also be referred to as “program-synchronous.”)

“Always-on enhancements, such as navigation bars, that are constantlyaccessible at the click of a remote control or mouse.”

“Asynchronous or post-broadcast enhancements that are silentlytransmitted into the DTV receiver's memory and can be activated when theviewer chooses.”

“Interpolated (for lack of better word) enhancements that the viewer canchoose to insert seamlessly into an ongoing program.” (This causes thefirst program to stop, then resume after the enhancement, giving theeffect of an insertion.)

Figures

Referring now to FIGS. 1-7, wherein similar components are referenced inlike manner, various features for a method and apparatus for navigatinghypermedia using multiple coordinated input/output device sets aredisclosed.

Turning now to FIG. 1, therein is depicted a schematic of an exemplaryhome system environment 100, which with its key systems and device setsand related elements. A number of typically independent systems, arerepresented (having associated device sets not shown here in detail),including TV or ITV system 130, PC 140, and PDA and/or phone 150, andthe like. The TV/ITV 130 is understood to commonly include a set-topbox. These systems typically contain their own transient and persistentstorage subsystems, not shown, and may share a common local storagesystem 160. These systems may connect to each other and the outsideworld via a home network or LAN (local area network) or hub 128, whichmay use wired and/or wireless technology. Auxiliary services may also beprovided by a home gateway server, which may be combined with the LAN,STB, PC, or other device capable of acting as a server, and with otherservice components. External connections may be made directly from asingle system, as shown for cable 122 connecting to the TV (STB), butmay preferably be connected to a home network to facilitate shared useby multiple systems, as shown for the connection to the Internet 124,and connection to wireless network 126 (which could also be an Internetconnection, such as using Mobile IP). These external connections provideaccess to various servers and other sources for a variety of sources ofcontent and connectivity 110, which may include broadcast, satellite,and cable TV, video on demand, IPTV, streaming media, Web content,wireless portals, transaction servers, and the like.

Referring now to FIG. 2, therein is depicted a more detailed exemplaryschematic of typical TV and PC systems and associated device sets. FIG.2 a depicts the case of independent systems, showing home area network128 connecting to both TV STB 210 and PC 220. TV STB 210 is used inconjunction with TV receiver or monitor 212 and remote control (RC) 214.The TV receiver 212 and RC 214 together constitute a device set, DS1.The controlling device TV STB 210 may for some purposes also beconsidered part of the device set DS1, and is considered together withthe other elements of DS1 to constitute a system, S1. The PC 220 (moreprecisely the system unit) is used in conjunction with monitor 222 andkeyboard 224, as well as other peripheral or input/output (I/O) devicessuch as a mouse, not shown. Those PC elements together constitute thedevice set DS2 (which may for some purposes also be considered toinclude the PC system unit) and system S2.

FIG. 2 b depicts an alternative case of an integrated system in which asingle set of hardware takes the role of controller 260 providingfunctions of both a TV STB and a PC system unit, equivalent to devices210 and 220, and thus represents a single alternative system S1. In thiscase TV receiver 262 and remote control 264 constitute an alternativeembodiment of device set DS1, and the PC monitor 272 and keyboard 274constitute an alternative embodiment of device set DS2. Again, thecontroller may or may not be meant to be included in references thosedevice sets, but it should be assumed to be excluded in references thatdistinguish the two device sets. In this special case, if bothcapabilities were fully developed such that one function was not clearlysubordinate to the other, the overall system complex could be consideredboth TV-like and computer-like. The device sets could still beconsidered to be either TV-like or computer-like respectively, not both,and they could be considered not independent of one another with regardto processing, as described further below.

It will be understood that the definition of membership of specific UIdevices in device sets may at times be somewhat fuzzy, and may involvemembership of one device in multiple device sets. For example, awireless keyboard might be usable to input to either or both of the TVand PC, depending on how it is set up and used. Similarly, a remotecontrol might be used to control both the TV and the PC. It will also beunderstood that the connections among devices that comprise a device setmight be made using any suitable connection method and topology. Suchconnections are now typically direct connections, whether wired orwireless, but emerging configuration alternatives might provide for suchconnections to be made through network 128, whether a single HAN, or oneof multiple such networks. Such networked configurations might furtherfacilitate flexible and fuzzy composition and reconfiguration of devicesets. Broadly speaking, the membership of a device in a device set willbe understood in terms of the current dynamics of the user browsingactivity, and the systems that such devices communicate with at a giventime, and that often the use of display devices might be the essentialdeterminant of a device set.

Actual embodiments can be expected to be determined by a complex mix offactors, only one of which is suitability to the browsing task. Thesefactors include legacy equipment installed base constraints, industrytradition, vendor/intermediary/consumer market power, bundling,provisioning, policy, standards, regulation, and the like. Thus methodsthat are adaptable and broadly applicable to a wide range ofconfiguration alternatives that may not be the ideal choices may bebeneficial.

A key aspect of MMUIs is the concept of device sets, and the distinctionof device sets is sharpest in the case of independent systems. A keyattribute of an independent system is that it has its own processor(s),and is thus capable of running applications and driving UI device setsin a reasonably independent fashion, depending on the nature of theapplication and its dependence on external storage, network, and serverresources. For example, an independent system is normally capable ofrunning a “thin client,” such as a browser, even if support for a “richclient” or “thick client” application may be limited. An equivalenthardware appliance with similar independent processing capabilities isalso considered independent.

A closely related factor is whether a device in question is used as anI/O device between the user and a processor, or as an intelligentprocessor that is peer (or in a client/server role) to anotherprocessor. Subtleties arise when multiple intelligent devices are usedtogether, such as when an intelligent system acts in a role that makesit subordinate to another intelligent system, more or less as a simpleI/O device, and when it acts in multiple varying roles. Thusindependence can be a matter of degree, and can be more operative insome usage roles than others. A criterion that can be helpful inclarifying these cases is whether the system is sufficiently independentto be considered by the user as a separate computer, usable separately,or whether it produces the illusion of a single computer (e.g., that mayhave multiple devices sets attached).

In a hypothetical distributed configuration, for example, an intelligenttablet or monitor device could be considered independent of a supportingPC if the tablet runs its own browser (such as under Windows CE) toobtain hypermedia resources in resource format (such as HTML) and renderthem into presentation format for display (such as display buffer imageformat), and could be considered not independent of the PC if it isdriven as a replicated display by the PC, with rendering controlled by abrowser at the PC and using a technology such as Windows TerminalServices (WTS) or the like, to transfer the resultant presentation tothe tablet at the level of display buffer image format (or coded changesthereto). WTS and similar offerings from CITRIX use MICROSOFT RemoteDesktop Protocol (RDP) or the closely related CITRIX IndependentComputing Architecture (ICA), which are related to the ITU T.120standard, to support a relatively dumb thin client that for the mostpart offers basic I/O terminal function only. Continuing thishypothetical, it should be noted that an independent structurealternative of this class could be the much simpler (and more efficientone) architecturally, in that a browser on the tablet can act as thinclient directly to a Web server, using a base PC only as an intermediatenetwork routing node, as opposed to an dependent structure in which atablet operates as a WTS or CITRIX style thin client I/O terminal to anPC (WTS or CITRIX style) server, which in turn mediates input anddisplay I/O to support a browser on the PC (driven by that terminal) asa second level of thin client (to a Web server). It will also beunderstood that either of these PC-supported structures would still beindependent of a separate TV system with which it might be used forcoordinated browsing. In the same manner, such a tablet device could besupported or driven by a TV/STB system (instead of by a PC), with thesame possibilities for dependent or independent structure alternatives,and potentially using the same protocols. If such thin client devicesbecome popular, this might be an attractive way to add MMUI support to aTV/STB system, incorporating off-the-shelf terminal devices—devices thata user might already possess or acquire for other uses as well.

A minor variation on this kind of distributed I/O theme is representedin systems like X Windows, which uses the X protocol to define aseparation between an application and its display, with a windowsmanager that runs on a client and the application on a server (which Xrefers to as server and client, respectively, in reverse of the nowcommon convention that is used herein) and in the I3ML (InternetInterface and Integration Markup Language) proposed by COKINETICS thatapplies somewhat similar concepts to distributing Windows UI controls.Here again, if the core browser functions of converting resourcesobtained in resource format to presentation display format is done at aserver, this could be considered a dependent I/O device architecturewith respect to the server, for purposes of this discussion.

These issues also relate to hypothetical configurations where anintelligent remote control might be used with a TV/STB system or otherdevices. A key factor is whether the device is used as an I/O devicebetween the user and a processor, or as an intelligent processor peer toanother processor. A dumb remote is considered part of the device set ofthe device it controls, so a multi-function remote used to controlmultiple systems may at times participate in multiple devices sets. Asmart remote, such as one based on a PDA might also operateindependently, thus constituting a separate device set (and separatesystem) in that use. Thus a PDA acting as an independent but coordinatedbrowser in conjunction with an ITV system could be consideredindependent and a separate device set in that use (being a peerprocessor), but to the extent that it also serves directly in emulationof a standard remote to the ITV system by sending standard remotecontrol commands as activated by a user (as a simple I/O device), thatuse could be considered dependent in relation to the ITV systemcontroller and thus part of the ITV device set. Similar variations inroles may arise in the case that an intelligent monitor is used as a TVmonitor, with more or less added intelligent functionality.

These issues can also get complicated in some cases of a single systemdriving multiple devices. One instructive example is the use of abrowser with a dual-display PC, and some hypothetical multi-monitorconfigurations are considered as examples of how the methods proposedherein might be embodied in selected cases. First, consider the basicstructure of a single system controlled by the single keyboard andmouse, but having two directly attached monitors. This can be consideredto be one “augmented” or “enriched” device set, as opposed to twoseparate device sets, since only a single input device set is used, andthis is really just a case of adding more screen area of similar formfactor. Further, at a software level, two monitors attached in such away may actually be seen by the browser application software as a singlemonitor of double size, because standard Windows and APPLE Macintoshmulti-monitor support provides for a virtual desktop that offersapplications a mapping from a single extended virtual frame buffer seenby the application (browser) software to the two real frame buffers(corresponding to the primary and secondary monitors in Windowsterminology) that drive the monitor devices. In such a configuration(whether using a virtual desktop or a separate, real display, anindependent display in Windows terminology), coordination of browsingacross the multiple monitors could be much simpler than for anindependent system configuration with independent device sets, becauseall browsing can be done using a single set of input controls to asingle browser instance that simply controls the two display monitors inmuch the same way that it could ordinarily control multiple windows onthe same display monitor. Such a single browser instance could havefull, exclusive, direct access to, and control of, all browser stateinformation, including all UI inputs and other I/O events, all cachesand work areas, all storage, and the like, and thus could drive the twodisplays in the same way that it could drive multiple windows on asingle display (if it could even see the two as separate displays). Thusin this case, basic support for simple targeting of alternate displaysis a relatively simple variation from the existing function of targetingto alternate windows on the same display, and use of anexporter/importer transport function might not be required. The browsercould simply control activity in the second display area by selectingwindows on that monitor (or that portion of the virtual monitor).

A variation on such a case could occur if, as an added feature, the userwere permitted to open a second browser process instance, andcoordination across browser instances were desired. In such a case, theaddition of export/import functions could be required, but this could besomewhat simplified in that much state information (such a page caches,history lists, and the like) may be in commonly accessible storage, andthus need not be included in the export/import process. This case isalso simplified in that, being on the same machine, the two browserinstances share common access to the hypermedia storage layer, and cancommunicate via intra-system means.

A further level of simplicity to be expected in such a hypotheticalconfiguration is that, using standard multi-monitor support for a PC (orMac), such displays must be functionally equivalent, driven as standardPC displays, with a possibility of only the minor differences in sizeand resolution that is typical of PC monitors. This means that therendering and presentation need not be adapted to deal with varyingdisplay characteristics (at least not beyond the basic levels ofadaptation that might optionally be used at the server by highly tunedWeb sites that sense a range of standard display resolutions usingstandard Web and browser support and adjust the pages servedaccordingly).

It will be understood that mirroring of displays, in which a displayimage is exactly duplicated on a second display, offers a relatedfunction that is widely available, and can be used to provide some basiccapabilities in support of a multimachine-type UI, even though, as isclear from the teachings herein, it is generally desirable that theimages in different device sets not be identical.

Specific components of the systems portrayed in FIGS. 1 and 2 tend to besomewhat divergent in current technology embodiments, and vary in accordwith form-factor, but can be expected to increasingly converge towardsimilar or common technologies. These components include all of theusual elements of such systems, such as CPUs and other processors,clocks, various specialized logic processors, including, CODECs(Coder/Decoders), DSPs (Digital Signal Processors), ASICs (ApplicationSpecific Integrated Circuits), PLDs (Programmable Logic Devices),caches, RAM (Random Access Memory), ROM (Read-Only Memory), and othermemory and storage devices including volatile and permanent storage usedfor transient and persistent files, buses and connectors, varioustransducers for local and remote communications and device interfacing,including radio frequency (RF), Infrared (IR), optical, fiber, coaxialcable (baseband or broadband), telephone cable,multiplexors/demultiplexors, and modems or other analog-to-digitalconverters, and direct connections to peripherals, includinginput/output devices, including displays, keyboards, and pointingdevices, and to other equipment, including A/V equipment, including TVmonitors, speakers, microphones, and cameras. Elements supportingcurrent TV/STB functions may further include, in the current OpenCableSTB for example, tuners for in-band and out-of-band signals, NTSC andQAM demodulators, Point-of-deployment (POD) modules, MPEG-2 transportdemuxes, MPEG-2 decoders and graphics overlay processors, AC-3 decodersand audio synthesis, NTSC encoders, IEEE 1394 interfaces and RFmodulators, RF inputs/outputs, digital and baseband audioinputs/outputs, baseband video, S-video, composite video, and componentvideo inputs/outputs, and various digital inputs/outputs including gameports, data ports, and IR receivers and transmitters, as well asdisplays and keypads.

These systems also typically include software, including systemssoftware, such as operating systems, network software, and middleware,and applications software. Such categories are suggestive and relativeto the mission of the system. For example, browsers may be variouslycategorized as applications, middleware, or even operating systemelements. Operating systems may be standard systems such as MICROSOFTWindows, UNIX, LINUX, and APPLE Mac OS X, or embedded operating systemssuch as MICROSOFT CE, PALM-OS, WINDRIVER VXWORKS, MICROWARE OS-9 andDAVID, as well as other system software such as Jini, JXTA, .NET, Webservers, Web services, agent systems, and programming languages andenvironments, such as JAVA, C, C++, C#, J2ME, JavaTV, Java VirtualMachines, FLASH, and the like. Standard file systems and databasemanagement systems such as relational (typically using SQL) or object orobject-relational databases may also be employed, as well as alternativedata structures such repositories and registries LDAP (LightweightDirectory Access Protocol), and storage structures, such as tuplespaces. The term “database” is used herein to refer collectively to allsuch collections of data. It will be understood that any suitablesystems and application software languages, environments, tools,frameworks, and systems may be applied in these systems and inembodiments of the methods described herein, and also that alldescriptions of methods herein are meant to be inclusive of embodimentsbased on object-oriented design and programming. It is also noted thatalternative designs might be embodied entirely in hardware and/orfirmware, such as based on ASICs and/or PLDs, and that, unless otherwiseindicated or clear from context, software is meant to include suchhardware/firmware implementations of functions that might be commonlysupported in software.

Application and middleware technologies might include those based ontraditional “thick client” architectures that provide high functionwithin a user system, Web-like “thin client” architectures that relyheavily on browser functions and thus might limit local client logic andstorage capabilities and be highly dependent on a server for richerfunction, and “rich client” architectures that might provide much of thepower of a thick client, but might be capable of operating within abrowser runtime environment and thus gain many of the deploymentbenefits of a thin client, or any combination or variation on thesemodels. Thus it should be understood generally that the system elementsdescribed here might be embodied in distributed forms that draw onremote systems and services. Such remotely distributed embodiments coulddraw on supplementary resources, including hardware, software, and data,as well as management and support services. In such cases, the remoteelements (e.g., Web servers, Web services, head-end servers, or thelike) might operate essentially as Application Service Providers (ASPs)to provide functions that might otherwise be local to the user, and thusmight be equivalent to non-distributed embodiments for many purposes. Itwill be understood that smart clients may have attributes of both thinand thick clients, and unless otherwise indicated or clear from context,references herein to either thin or thick clients are meant to beinclusive of smart clients that share similar attributes relevant to thecontext.

It is further noted that local and/or remote elements may haveagent-like roles and functions. These might include services as agentfor the user (such as, for example, coordination functions as describedherein, program guide/selection services, and the like) and/or servicesfor other parties (such as advertising targeting services). Such rolescould be independent of location, such as in the case of ad targetingselections, which might be done at a head-end or a STB.

System elements may preferably conform to formal or de-facto standards,such as OpenCable, Open Services Gateway Initiative (OSGi), UniversalPlug and Play (UPnP), Home Audio/Video Interoperability (HAVi), VideoElectronics Standards Association (VESA) Home Network group (VHN),Architecture for HomeGate (AHRG), AUTOHAN, MHP (Multimedia HomePlatform), DASE (Digital TV Applications Software Environment), and thelike. Digital Rights Management (DRM) and Conditional Access (CA)technologies may be provided, including devices and associated protocolsfor decryption and for identification of users and their entitlements,including OpenCable Point-of-Deployment (POD) modules, smart cards,High-Bandwidth Digital Content Protection (HDCP), or others. As usedherein, references to DRM are meant to be inclusive of CA.

These devices, device sets, and systems are meant to be representativeof the full range of current and future devices and configurations thatmay be suitable for use by a user or group of users to view hypermediacontent such as ITV, whether in a home or office, or other context suchas in a car or using wearable devices (such as head-mounted display,HMD), or immersive environments such as CAVE, or even implantable orbionic devices, which may include heads-up display, retinal projection,neural or EEG (electroencephalography) interfaces, and appropriatecontrols. Devices include the full range from conventional and digitalTV and enhanced TV, PC-type devices, whether desktop or portable,personal digital assistants (PDAs) and cell phones. It is expected thatthere will be ongoing convergence among all sorts of devices that allowaccess to and interaction with content, but that such devices willcontinue to group into families with different form factors and usageorientations. Major categories are likely to be as shown, with TVs beingoriented to passive across the room viewing, primarily tuned to video,PCs oriented to active lean-forward use, primarily tuned to richmultimedia interaction, and PDAs for handheld use, with more limitedscreens and controls.

Content sources are intended to include all electronically accessiblemedia, notably TV, movies, audio, multimedia, Web and other text, andonline transaction systems. TV includes broadcast, satellite, cable,video-on-demand and pay-per-view, as well as stored content on variedstorage media. Local storage includes hard disks, DVD, CD, VCR,TiVO/Replay, etc. Multimedia includes all forms of video and audioincluding hypermedia and virtual reality. Web and other computer contentand transactions include all forms of Web content, wireless portalcontent, shopping and other transaction systems, text and multimediadatabases and search systems, data processing and information systems,and the like.

Networks include direct connections between these elements, and variousadvanced network services, and these are essentially equivalent withregard to the intent of the coordination methods described. Majorcategories include home networks and LANs, whether wired or wireless(using such technologies as infrared (IRDA standard, etc.) and RadioFrequency (Bluetooth standard, 802.11X, etc.), the Internet, includingthe Web and streaming media and e-mail and other applications, andwireless networks including analog and digital telephony and access toInternet and other content and transactions, including access throughportals using such technologies as WAP and iMode.

Turning now to FIG. 3, therein is depicted exemplary typical displaysfor ITV hyperbrowsing. These may include standard TV screens andstandard computer and PDA screens, with a wide variety of combinationcases, and with variations as to form factor both for the display andthe input controls and devices. A simple example is basic TV/videoscreen 310, depicted as presenting a video program “A.”. This is just astandard video image as normally presented directly onto a TV monitor,of whatever resolution, whether standard definition or high definition,or otherwise. Optional variations relevant to ITV systems include theoverlay on the main screen of a simple graphic, sprite, or bug 312,shown here a an “i” like the bug used by the WINK ITV system, that isdisplayed when ITV content is available for the video segment currentlyshowing. Other simple variations include addition of simple overlay area314, representative of various similar overlays that can be used topresent text or other information (which may cover a portion of the TVimage, or cause the TV image to be shrunk. Similar overlays may beinserted into a video signal at a distribution source, as is now commonfor news and sports programming, such as on FOX, but with digital STBs,such overlays may be inserted by the STB or ITV system at the user site.

A more advanced ITV screen typical on what may be produced by a commonITV system driving a TV is shown as ITV screen 320. This represents anactive navigation of ITV hypermedia or hypermedia-like resources,including menu 322, which provides a simple list of options, usually insimple text, but potentially with graphics as well. In a typicalnavigation process from the basic program screen 310, such a screen maybe obtained as a result of entering a select key on the remote control,but it may come from any interactive step, using any of a variety ofnavigation controls. On selection of an entry from the menu, interactivecontent screen 324 may be presented. Depending on system design, thismay fill the screen, or appear with the menu 322, or may include afurther menu, not shown. A further feature shown is picture-in-picture(PIP) frame 326, which is a region of the screen used to present areduced scale video image. This may be the base program to which the ITVenhancements relate, or some other video resource. Alternatively, such avideo frame may revert to full screen, and exclude other items fromview.

The comparable, but much richer ITV screen typical of a morehigh-resolution computer based ITV or similar hypermedia browsingexperience is shown as PC ITV window 330. This basically has all of thefunction typical of GUI displays. Typical features include menu bar 332with active menu drop-down list 333 that responds to a user selectionwithout need to change other screen areas, interactive content 334,which may be a Web page or other format, video window 336, which may beplaced in a variety of fixed positions or positioned by the user, orembedded in interactive content page 334, and task bar 338, which can beused to switch among other active windows. Window 330 may appear in afull screen maximized view or an intermediate size (as shown), or may beminimized to be hidden except for the appearance of a tab on the taskbar 338, which can be clicked to bring back display of the window.Additional windows may appear concurrently, in various configurations,such as stacked as shown, tiled into a mosaic of frames, and the like,or remain hidden in virtual layers, including cases of layers that areselectable with tabbed control indicators or other control schemes.Presentation alternatives may exploit any suitable combination ofMultiple Document Interface (MDI) and/or Single Document Interface (SDI)window formats.

Also comparable, but simpler, is an example of a relatively constrainedPDA/phone screen 340. Here activity typically results in replacement ofone screen with another, sometimes with limited combinations on onescreen, as shown for menu screen 342, content screen 344, and videoscreen 346, shown with a small menu area included. Use of video on PDAsand phones is not yet common, but is expected to become so.

It should be understood that in addition to conventional GUIs and thebasic UIs specifically addressed herein, these methods are also directlyapplicable to other UI approaches. These include advanced interfacesthat go beyond the traditional GUI of the WIMP (Windows, Icons, Menusand Pointing Device) paradigm, including LifeStreams, data walls, andricher 3DVR, collaborative virtual environments (CVEs), andmulti-sensory-modal UIs, as well as methods for flexible cross-platformand/or cross-device user interfaces, such as XUL (XML User InterfaceLanguage) and XUP (eXtensible User Interface Protocol). It will also beunderstood that while these display variations have been described inconnection with their traditionally usual hardware context, thatconnection is not essential, and that there may be uses with otherhardware configurations, such as, for example TVs that support highresolution GUIs (such as on high definition monitors), TVs that providefor two or more screens (perhaps in a manner similar to that ofmulti-monitor PCs), PCs that present low resolution ITV-style UIs (suchas for lean-back use); and other variations.

One simple UI variation that deserves mention for its common use incurrent TV/STB-based ITV systems is the use of alternative navigationmethods to obtain interactive services that are not directly coupled toa base TV program, but may be obtained by entering a special channelnumber or by selection from an EPG. Variations on these methods havebeen called virtual channels or walled gardens or portals (and these mayalso be described as asynchronous). Like Web portals or walled gardenservices, these may provide some selection of services, such as weather,news, sports, shopping, and the like, that are available on demand. Itwill be apparent that, for purposes of the methods described herein,selection of such a virtual channel directly, via an EPG selection, orby any other method is just another navigation action, and that thesession transfer methods described herein can be applied to any suchnavigation action, using similar command variations to specify thetargeting of a transfer request.

Referring now to FIG. 4, therein is depicted an exemplary schematic ofstate data relating to two systems and in a migration process. Depictedis a base state 410 for a system A, and a base state for a system B,where each system has multiple browser sessions, A1, A2, B1, B2, and thelike, each of which may constitute a distinct user session. A complexuser session may actually involve active use of multiple software tasks,each constituting an application session running different softwareapplications, such as writing with a word processor and referring to Webreferences, but this discussion addresses the case of sessions based onbrowsing tasks. This is further simplified by considering user sessionson different browser instances at a given device set as separate browsersessions, so a user session may have multiple browser sessions. Somediscussion is given to migration of such compound sessions combiningmultiple browser instances at a given device set, but for simplicity,much of the detail focuses on the case of migrating a single browsersession. Based on these teachings, extension to the multi-session casewill be straightforward for one skilled in the art.

One aspect of the present invention is the abstraction, extraction, andexchange of session state data that specifies the current state of alive interactive session in progress. The base state 410 of a givensystem A includes static settings 412, which control user options as tohow the system behaves and presents itself. These include imagebrightness and contrast settings for a display and a wide range ofpreference settings for a PC or other system and its suite of associatedsoftware applications, again with emphasis here on the browser.

Complementing this is the transient state data 414 that defines thecurrent status of an interactive user session relating to browsersession A1, and similar transient state data 416 for session A2. Asystem may have a number of sessions in progress at once, whetherindependent or related, each defined by the state of navigationalposition through multimedia content (including the time-position incontinuous media content and the special position in spatially-orientedcontent), the contents of various input and output elements andcontrols, the nature and configuration of open windows, menus, dropdowns, text entry boxes, check-boxes, etc., as well as the current stateof work files, buffers, databases, logs, in-flight transactions,embedded logic objects helper applications (such as streaming mediaplayers), etc. The transient state data for a browser includes theidentity (URL) of the resource being viewed, and at the time of linktraversal, includes all current state on the link arc and the process oftraversal. Depending on the nature and state of the session, and on thetype of systems being used, some or all of this transient state data maybe needed to migrate a session from one system to another.

Supplement data 418 for system A, not normally specified explicitly, canbe formalized to further describe the characteristics of that system A(such as coding conventions and other basic architectural attributes)that may need to be, known to embody a corresponding session on adissimilar system B.

The portable state 430 defines the subset of all such static and sessionstate data that may be needed to migrate any or all selected sessionsfrom a system A to any other supported system B, and the superset ofdata needed to migrate a single specific task. This may exclude somelocal state data in each portion of the base state that is not relevantto re-establishing a session in useful form, and at the desiredgranularity, on another system.

Given a request to transfer one or more sessions from A to a specificsystem B, a transfer state record 450, shown here for session A1, can beassembled. This includes only the relevant data to the specifiedsessions, and only the subset of that state data that is relevant to thecapabilities of system B. This portable state information can then beused to add an equivalent session A1′ to system B. This is shown in theschematic of the base state after migration 460 for system B. Dependingon the nature of the request, this equivalent session may present thecurrent resource presented for A1, or the new ending resource resultingfrom a link traversal initiated from A1. Also depending on the nature ofthe request and relevant user preference settings, static settings datafrom A might or might not be relevant to the transferred session A1′.

In various embodiments, supplemental data may be employed. Suchsupplemental data might, for instance, be employed in convertingsystem-dependent data to a recognizable and usable interchange format orcanonical form. In various embodiments, such supplemental data might,for example, be included in the state record

Turning now to FIG. 5, therein is depicted exemplary further details ofa migration as it is effected. System A 510 is shown as includingsession A1 520, a set of user interface devices and controls 530, and astate importer/exporter/tracker 540, which may be implemented as amodule that can be used with a standard browser. Initiation of amigration request results in the creation of transfer state record 550.(The term state set may be used synonymously with state record.) Thistransfer state record is used when a migration is triggered, which mayoccur in multiple ways. One way is that a user at one system requeststhat one or more sessions be migrated or transferred from a system A toa system B. For the example shown, a user at system A interacts throughavailable user interface (UI) controls to conduct a session, and thenmakes a request to migrate a session to system B. Stateimporter/exporter/tracker service component 540 provides these services.In the example of a user at system A requesting that session A1 swing tosystem B, this request is processed by the exporter services on system A540, which extracts the portable state, creates a transfer state record550, and passes it to system B 560. The corresponding importer services590 on System B then use that data to activate an equivalent sessionin-progress, A1′, on system B. Alternatively, the migration may betriggered by other means, for example based on coding of targetattributes for the link. Processing of such cases is essentially thesame.

Optional features may allow the user to specify any of a range of casesfor coordinating ongoing activity on the two parallel sessions A1 onsystem A and A1 on system B. These may include terminating the originalA1 on system A or leaving it unchanged. In the case of migrations from abase TV program, leaving A unchanged might typically be preferable, butfor migrations from interaction with currently-displayed enhancementsfor an ITV program on a TV, terminating the enhancement session may bepreferable. For the case of migration from a PC, leaving the sessionunchanged may be preferable. An optional capability provides for ongoinginteraction with the two sessions as one linked, shared session on bothsystems, acting like a collaboration system (or a fully synchronizedmultimodal session). Variations could make the session viewable on bothsystems, and could permit either or both systems to interact with andcontrol the ongoing activity of the session. This is shown in FIG. 5 asadditional transfers of state, with #1 creating the session on system B,as already described, #2 relaying an interaction on system B back tosystem A, and #3 relaying a subsequent interaction on system A back tosystem B. Such relays of ongoing interactions can be conveyed bytransfer state records such as the session A1′ state record 555 shownfor #2. Thus users could treat the sessions A1 and A1′ as a singlelogical shared session, in a manner similar to that used in conventionalcollaboration systems, in which all significant interaction events arereplicated and synchronized as they occur. Such systems might add thefeatures described here for non-synchronous migrations as an addedfeature.

Referring now to FIG. 6, therein is depicted the flow of an exemplaryprocess 600 of transfer showing export and import of state. The processbegins on system A with an interactive session in progress (step 605),in this case a browser session A1. A transfer request to transfer thebrowser session A1 to system B is initiated by reception of some triggerevent (step 610). Typical trigger events include a user request tore-target an ending resource or to duplicate the current resource to thetarget system, whether to a new window or an existing window.Alternative events include link attribute coding as specified by atarget attribute (following the model HTML) or a show attribute(following the XLink model) which may be triggered on link activation,or on load, as specified by an actuate attribute. To prepare for that, atransfer state record is assembled by exporter/importer/tracker forbrowser session A1 (step 615). With all necessary information on thesession to be transferred assembled and packaged for transfer, thatstate record with any associated information is exported to system B(step 620). This may be done by direct communication to system B, or viasome intermediary controller system. Depending on options selected, thesession A1 at system A may be terminated, left in as is to continueindependent of the transferred version A1′ running on system B, or, ifcollaboration/synchronization features are supported, tracking may beapplied to keep the two sessions synchronized as events occur on eitheror both of system A and B. In the case of such tracking, theexporter/importer/tracker on system A exports similar state records (orsimplified event records) to echo all relevant interaction events tosystem B (and imports any corresponding events from system B, as notedbelow) (step 625).

Meanwhile, at system B, unrelated activities are presumably in progress(step 650). Alternatively, system B could be idle, or it could be off,and might preferably have support features to sense and activate it onreceipt of a transfer request. On receiving the transfer request (fromstep 620 on system A), the exporter/importer/tracker on system B importsthe state record for session A1, interpreting and converting details asneeded to accommodate any differences in capabilities, architecture, andpreferences at system B (step 655). The exporter/importer/tracker thensets up session A1′ as an active browser session on system B, loadingthe desired resource, and setting up other aspects of context asappropriate in accord with the transfer state record (step 660). If thetarget is to an existing browser session, this setup activity can belimited to making just the changes resulting from the transfer.Optionally, if collaboration/synchronization tracking was requested,further steps by exporter/importer/tracker on system B will maintaintracking to echo all relevant interaction events in either direction(step 665). Such tracking may optionally involve any number ofadditional systems as well (with additional transfers to first set themup, as well).

As noted, embodiments may add the MMUI support methods just described toexisting browsers, using methods that will be apparent to those skilledin the art. In some cases this may be done in the form of externalmodifications that could be done by third parties, and that may beretrofitted to installed systems. For example, with MSIE (version 4.0and later), there is formal support for Browser Extensions, relying onAPIs that provide access to browser functions, including MSHTML, theWebBrowser Control, and the associated objects, interfaces, functions,enumerations, and hosting features and ActiveX Hyperlinking and TravelLog and other features that is extensively documented on the MicrosoftDeveloper Network site. (including Programming and Reusing the Browser,WebBrowser Customization, and related sections). Similar capabilitiesmay also be available for other platforms, including PDAs, tablets, andSTBs. Alternatively, new versions of browsers may be created to add thisfunctionality. It will be understood that such functionality can also beprovided by other, more dynamic methods for adding program code tosupplement existing browser function, such as, for example by using Javaapplets, ActiveX controls, or the like.

It will further be understood, that in general, the methods describedherein provide these MMUI browsing capabilities as a routinely availablebrowsing feature that can be invoked at any time during any browsingsession, for any browseable resources from any source, independent ofany special support from any particular resource server that providesresources requested during the session, and without special need for anycode obtained in association with any particular resources requestedduring the session. An exception might occur in certain embodiments,such as, for example, those that use code distribution methods thatdeploy code dynamically, as delivered in association with particularresources and/or resources obtained from particular resource servers,such as for example in applets in particular pages from particular Websites, in which case the scope of such capabilities might be restrictedto browsing that is directed to those resources and/or servers. However,it will be understood that in embodiments that employ a remote portalservice, as described below, that portal might provide selectedfunctions in support of these methods, and might possibly do so usingdynamic code components that it causes to be served, but that dependenceon the use of the portal as a facilitating service might not necessarilyintroduce any limitation on the range of resources and servers that canbe accessed with the facilitation of that portal.

As noted, state records can be transferred directly between coordinatingsystems, or via intermediary controller systems. Other variations mayalso be useful, such as using special state intermediary repositories ordatabases. Standard interchange structures with well-defined formats andbased on standard interchange frameworks or metalanguages such as XMLmay be desirable to facilitate interchange of such state details amongsystems that may have heterogeneous architectures and may use differentbrowsers (or editors). One method is to communicate state via a tuplespace. Linda-like tuple spaces offer attractive properties as astate/event exchange medium for coordination systems in general, becauseof their flexibility and associative properties, and their applicationto the methods described herein will be apparent to one skilled in theart. Relevant developments include implementations of programmable XMLdataspaces that support distributed, federated tuple spaces and that addreactive properties for more flexible dynamic and rule-based behavior,and related work such as that described by Cabri, XML Dataspaces forMobile Agent Coordination, SAC'00.

At a broad level, the transfer process described herein may appear to besimilar to software task migration, in that a task at one system ismigrated to a second system. However, the transfer process describedherein differs for at least the reason that it is the session state ofthe task—not the actual program performing the task—that is migrated.

According to certain embodiments of the present invention, the transfermay draw on application awareness of transfer functionality tofacilitate export and import of state. It will be understood by thoseskilled in the art that these methods of transfer-aware applicationsupport, relating to export and import of state, could be applied notonly to browsing applications, but to most other kinds of applicationsas well, including for example, word processing, spreadsheet, analysis,drawing, database management, transaction processing, and the like.Adaptation of these migration or transfer methods to such otherapplications would primarily involve adaptation to the particularelements and granularities of state relevant to the particularapplication and need.

While adding migration-aware functionality might impose a developmentcost on each application, these methods could be simpler, moreefficient, and more readily achievable than more generalapplication-transparent methods, including those that might operateprimarily at an operating system or programming environment level.Alternately, perhaps to provide “transparency” to applications withregard to transfers, application awareness of transfer functionalitymight not be drawn upon.

These methods have been described for the case of a hypermedia systemarchitecture and coding conventions similar to those now in use on theInternet (with HTML, XHTML, and XLink) and in current ITV systems, butthey are equally applicable to alternative embodiments, as will be clearto one skilled in the art. Current Internet and ITV systems generallyare based on outbound links that are contained within a startingresource, but for some types of resource, such as image or video, thelink may not be in the resource itself, and thus technically athird-party arc with respect to that resource, but is directlyassociated with it, being contained within the context in which theresource is distributed, such as the Web page that loads an image orvideo, or the TV channel that includes a TV program and has associatedenhancement, such as in the VBI (Vertical Blanking Interval, such asNTSC Line 21 or PAL line 22) or VANC (Vertical Ancillary Data) or in theMPEG stream containing the TV program, possibly using SMIL, or in someother stream from the same feed source, such as a data or objectcarousel, or the like. Other past and possible future hypermedia systemsprovide richer linking methods, including richer use of third-partyarcs, and the methods described above are equally applicable to sucharchitectures.

Basic Device Set Management and Communications

As foundation support to the browsing process just described, it may bedesirable that a device set management process that performs basic setupand update functions be applied to pre-identify and dynamically discoverdevice sets that may be used in coordination with any given system, todefine combinations of such device sets as composing designated deviceset groups, and to set preferences for use of device set groups anddevice sets within groups. This provides a framework for determiningwhat transfer options should be considered and taken under specifiedconditions.

This communications process could desirably be based on and compatiblewith related lower-level processes and standards defined for linkingsuch existing devices and systems, such as networks and/or gatewaysbased on UPnP, HAVi, OSGi, Rendezvous and/or the like. Methods such asdefined in those standards could be applied to enable basiccommunications among the devices, to provide discovery, presence,registration, and naming services to recognize and identify devices asthey become available to participate in a network, and to characterizetheir capabilities.

Such a lower level network service could be employed as a base for themiddleware and/or application level coordination services describedherein. Useful communications services could include messaging servicesthat could be used to communicate session state transfer requests, eventservices that could be used for tracking session-related events, as wellas streaming services that could be used for relaying signals from onedevice to another as different presentation device sets come to needaccess to resources. Naturally these higher level services can beprovided independently of such standards or any available software thatsupports them, to the extent needed to support desired devices andservices, but use of available software and services could simplifyimplementation and have numerous well-known benefits associated with useof standards and COTS (commercial off-the-shelf) devices and software.

It should be understood that the lower level services provided by suchnetwork and gateway standards typically relate primarily tointerconnection of devices with regard to routing of signals (e.g.,between content access source devices and presentation devices) and ofcommands (e.g., between controller devices and devices that are subjectto command), but that it might in the future be desirable to extend suchstandards to include support for the kind of session-orientedcoordination and state transfer functions described herein. It isfurther noted that HAVi uses the term “target” in connection with remotecontrol action and observation commands to refer to hardware devices,not applications, and this usage differs from the hypermediaapplication-related notion of link targeting addressed herein.

It may be desirable that communications among local systems and devicesbe done using local network facilities, such as a LAN or HAN or thelike, or direct local connection, and that wide area networking to otherlocations be used primarily for access to external resources andservices. However, limitations in available facilities and support maymake it necessary at times for such communications to be via WAN, aswell, even though this may be counterintuitive. This is likely in nearterm embodiments, such as with STBs that have communications to head-endcable or satellite systems (and through them to the Internet), but notdirectly to local PCs or other systems. Legacy STBs may have no externallocal communications capability suitable for such use, and even thosethat do may not be commonly connected to the same network as the PC. PCsand the like may in many cases connect to the Internet via dial-up orDSL or other facilities unrelated to those used for the STB. In such acase, the more circuitous external path may be quite serviceable for thecoordination tasks described herein. Such a path could be a pureInternet path, such as using DOCSIS support from the STB to a separatecable modem that connects to the PC, and which merely routes through thehead-end, or it could use other protocols from the STB that may requireconversion and relay to the Internet by a server at the head-end.

This method of relay via a wide area network can be broadly useful,including for cases that do not involve cable TV services and STBs, butmight employ other network and device technologies. Such use of a WANcould substitute for a local connection between any device sets to becoordinated. For example, a PC or PC-DTV system (or a TV/STB), or otherdevice set might obtain resources via IP or other protocol over anysatellite, wireless, DSL, fiber, or other transmission path (or locally)and could coordinate in a similar manner with an independent device set(that also has remote communications facilities) over that or any otherbi-directional wide-area path. Such linkage could be on a directpeer-to-peer basis or be mediated by a server (whether remote or local).As a further example, a DVR, home media server, advanced TV, PC-DTV orthe like might obtain streamed video and movies from an Internet servicesuch as that of REALNETWORKS, and could coordinate a session relating tothose resources with related activity, such as an enhancement session,at another device set, through the Internet. Such coordination mightinvolve direct transfers to and from the second device set over theInternet, using the methods described above, or use relay through aremote server, such as one that might be provided by REALNETWORKS orothers. As will be apparent to one skilled in the art, such relay via aremote server, and possible provision of related value-added services,could be done in a manner substantially equivalent to that discussedfurther below with regard to cable head-end servers.

The hardware context that has been described may be impacted by theemergence of “modular” computer systems in which a core computer modulemay be swapped in and out of multiple sleeves, carriers, dockingstations, or other connection matrices and used in conjunction withdifferent user interface I/O device sets of varying form factors, suchas desktops, notebooks, tablets, and PDAs.

For such hardware devices, by providing for hot swapping such that thetransient I/O state of a session could be reestablished with a swappeddevice set, an effect having some similarity to a session transfer couldbe achieved by physically moving the core module from one device set toanother.

According to embodiments of the invention, such hot swapping capabilitycould be provided by adapting the export/import functions such that atransfer was done, not by transferring the state information to anotherprocessor, but by recognizing the change of I/O device sets connected tothe single core processor and reapplying the resource rendering andadaptation functions to take into account changes in resolution andrelated UI style adaptation, as described further below. This wouldeffectively substitute the renderings on one set of devices with theequivalent set of renderings on the new devices. In addition to thiscloned resource case, transfers could also involve a link traversal,with a change from a starting resource on a first connected device setto a selected ending resource on the new device set, but the cloned casewould be simpler and perhaps more generally useful.

However, much like a brain transplant, such a core module transfer woulddisconnect the original device sets and presumably move or halt allsessions controlled by that core module. Accordingly, such animplementation would not address, for example, the general objective ofMMUI use relating to the ability to use the multiple device sets atwill, such as in a multitasking situation in which each of multiplesub-sessions may be concurrently active on different ones of themultiple device sets. For that kind of use, multiple processors (or ashared/integrated processor configuration) would still be needed, withtransfers accomplished as described above, regardless of whether theprocessors were modular or not.

Push and Pull Methods for Controlling Transfers at Either Source orTarget Device Set

Embodiments of these methods can allow that transfers be triggered fromeither the source or the target device set. One case, as describedabove, is a “push” trigger that is activated while browsing on theoriginating (source) device set. The alternative case, which can beprovided as a complementary feature, could permit the user to act fromthe target device to trigger a “pull.” In this case, instead of system Bwaiting to receive a transfer request, a command on theas-yet-uncoordinated PC could actively request the transfer from the TV,signaling to the TV's exporter to send a state record back. In a basicembodiment, this could be as simple as a request to the TV for itscurrent channel, which can be accommodated with any TV that responds tobasic commands such as might be provided with network support (such asHAVi). This could enable a simple user command to “present enhancementsto the channel I am now watching.” The state record can also includetime-position information and more specific address details on thecurrent program resource to accommodate various kinds of programs,including stored resources, video-on-demand, streamed content, advancedfeature states such as camera angles, second audio program,closed-caption, and the like, as well as other details, such as any thatmight be relevant to a link arc, including perhaps an anchor position orregion, a pointer position or area of focus, and/or the like. Pulltransfers can also be supported during fully interactive sessions (onall kinds of device sets), including the same functions as described forpush transfers, and with the same flexibility in specifying whether theoriginal session is to be terminated or left as is (or put intocollaborative synchronization).

Pull transfers might add some additional complications, in that suchtransfers might be supported only at appropriate breakpoints in browsingactivity, and only with appropriate permission. An enabling controlcould be provided as part of the exporter to work with the browser toensure proper function, consistent with the granularity of statetransfer supported. This might involve refusing some pull requests,queuing some requests to be held until a suitable activity breakpoint isreached, or satisfying some requests as of a recent prior breakpointstate. For example, during a forms entry process, a pull request mightbe refused, held until the form is submitted, or accommodated with thestate set back to the initial state of the form. Security methods mightpresumably be desirable to verify that push and pull requests arepermitted on both sides, as noted below.

Various embodiments of the present invention may allow for a basic levelof enhancement activity to be active on an ongoing basis. Suchfunctionality might be employed, for example, to provide continuingdisplay of menu screens and base-level enhancements related to currentTV programming. Such activity might, for instance, be driven bytime-based links or triggers associated with that programming. Thismight be useful, for example, when a second device set is to beroutinely used for such enhancements. Such activity could be establishedin accord with various specifications and preferences controlled by theuser and/or the programmer.

In various embodiments of the present invention, once such an activityis established as a coordinated session, it might be appropriate totreat any relevant change of TV state, such as channel changes, VODprogram changes, or use of trick-play or time-shifting functions, ascausing implicit transfer requests to maintain that coordinationautomatically. Such operating conventions could, for example, give theeffect of a second screen that is always coordinated with whatever is onthe TV, and thus might be applied as the standard operating practice forthe simple coordination services, such as, for example, the portal-basedservices described below, or other similar modes of use.

Resource Access

With regard to the underlying hypermedia resources, it may be desirablethat these methods rely on the device sets making access to the sameresources from the storage layer. Given that heterogeneous device setssuch as TVs, PCs, PDAs, and the like require significantly differentpresentation styles, this is may be accommodated by adaptation at theclient, and this may be based in part on alternative stylerecommendations contained within the resources. Thus, for example, anITV enhancement resource (such as a Web page) could be coded to indicateone style of presentation for a TV screen, perhaps the same or slightlyricher presentation for a PDA, and a significantly richer presentationfor a PC. As has been recognized for the related case of phone and PDAaccess to the Web, this reliance on a single source with multiple stylecodings, such as using XHTML or CSS, offers significant advantages incontent management and flexibility, and this has recently led to broaderattention to device independence within the W3C. Useful methods might bedrawn from the ongoing work of the MPEG-21 Digital Item Adaptationeffort, as will be apparent to one skilled in the art.

This distributed, specialized, ad hoc approach to rendering alsosimplifies the demands on the browser, and facilitates optimal controlof rendering appropriate to any device. Each system can be equipped witha browser specifically suited to the rendering tasks appropriate to thedevice sets it normally supports, avoiding the need for a commonsuper-browser able to support any device that may be joined into a MMUI.Similarly, it avoids the need for coordinating alternative browserrendering processes dynamically, since binding is to the common storedform of the resource. Details of varying adaptations can be left to thetarget browser and need not be resolved until presentation time.

Other efficiencies may also be achieved by direct access. One relates tobandwidth efficiency, since stored forms of resources are generallydesigned to be compact and bandwidth efficient for the particular kindof content involved, while alternative methods of transmitting data in adisplay image or other partially rendered form may be less efficient.Another relates to the complexity of a two level relay and conversionwith an intermediate system, as described previously with regard to theWTS architecture. A further example of benefits of direct access in thecase of video is in the use of receiver-driven layered multicasting(RLM), which layers video into multiple multicast streams so that areceiver subscribes to only the streams necessary to get a desiredresolution. Since a PC device using video as secondary content, orpossibly for pointing device/screen support secondary to the TV (e.g.,as a way to point to objects on the TV screen using the more convenientand precise pointing devices of a PC device set, such as one in whichthe TV screen content is mirrored on the PC monitor), could need lessresolution than a TV or HDTV, the PC could obtain the video at thisreduced, less intensive level. This may obviate receiving the additionallayers at all, or at least eliminate them from being forwarded from a TVsystem to the PC device set (in whatever format).

This single-source approach may be valuable in simplifying the task ofITV deployment, by cleanly decoupling content issues from presentationsystem implementation details, except for cleanly specified stylevariations. Content producers need be less concerned about whicharchitectures and form factors are being used for viewing, and need notface fragmentation of their markets caused by incompatibilities inviewing system. At an initial, base level implementation, allenhancements could be coded for a TV form factor viewing alone, and suchresources could be usable, if not optimal, on PC form factors and onmost tablet and PDA form factors. Thus content providers can have fullreach to all form factors, and can selectively add style variations tothose resources and for those form factors that warrant the investment.Techniques for automated style transformation (based on set rules andstyle sheets and/or more adaptive programmed transformation methods)could also be applicable with more or less workable results. This issimilar to the conversion now done in some cases for phone access to Webpages, but it can be expected that up-conversion from low to highresolution, as desired here, could be much more effective thandown-conversion, as done for Web-phones. A promising short-term methodis to create server-based adapters (or proxy servers) do thisup-conversion and concurrently adapt access and coding from nativeproprietary ITV formats to Web format.

These services could be architected much like “clipping servers” usedfor down-conversion of Web pages for access by phones and PDAs, butinstead performing the up-conversion to Web pages in what might becalled a “composition server” that combines small pages and short,simple menu controls into larger, richer pages with more powerful andvaried controls. Over time, a preferable method may be to adapt currentITV content and presentation systems to use Web technologies andstandards (such as HTML and HTTP, or newer standards such as XHTML) asnative formats for resource access and coding, still providing for thesmall pages and simple menu controls suited to TV form factors as atleast one of the included styles (but gradually adding the improvedcapabilities to finely control alternate style codings for richer formfactors, as described). Advanced standards for style specification andtransformation such as CSS (Cascading Style Sheets), XSL (ExtensibleStylesheet Language), XSLT (XSL Transformations), or RML (RelationalMarkup Language) can also be applied, as can the use of embeddedprogramming objects such as ASP (Active Server Pages), JSP (Java Serverpages), or the APACHE Struts Framework. As will be apparent to oneskilled in the art, any of these current and emerging methods can beused to give the effect of variant resources for each of a number orform factors. For example, use of RML or XSLT could permit pagetemplates coded in HTML, XML, XHTML or other formats to be transcoded(to or from one another) based on the structure of the content and thecontext of the target device set to allow for changes in UI elements,pagination with automated insertion or collapse of links, and otherstyling actions, and related methods can be used to control the stylingof link presentation and traversal as well.

It should be noted that in embodiments where direct common resourceaccess is not practical, it may be necessary for link arc and/orresource data to be transferred as part of the state information (or asa supplementary element or stream of elements). An example of suchinformation might be ATVEF triggers and embedded resources.

Linkage and Transfer from Pure Video Sessions to an Enhancement

The case of transfer from an interactive resource is generally asdescribed above, but the case of transfer from pure video is in someways simpler, with some aspects that may be further clarified. Forsimple video there is less context or state information needed, with oneelement being the identity of the program and another element being thetime position within the program. In certain cases there may also bespatial selection information, such as when activating a “hot spot” as astarting resource that indicates a specific region, corresponding tosome viewed object (such as an actor or player, or an item ofmerchandise). Some or all of this basic information is readily availablefrom any advanced TV system or STB, and can be expected to becomeuniversal as such systems and associated home networks proliferate. Itmay also be obtained by external means, even with basic TV devices, asnoted below. (Certain cases may also involve active enhancementresources, as well.

According to embodiments of the invention, if the video is from arealtime broadcast (or other realtime source, such as a camera), thetime position can be taken to be just the current real time. Should itnot be realtime video, or should it be desired that it not be treated asrealtime, time-position information (relative to the beginning or someother reference point) can be obtained by a number of methods, includingreading embedded time code data, or externally tracking time-position.The TV exporter can extract or derive such time code data to include inthe state record. If VCR-like trick play functions or other hypermediacontrols are allowed to alter the play of the base program, andsynchronization of enhancements at another device set is to bemaintained, then a tracking process can be used to advise the otherdevice set of the resulting changes in state (time-position) as theyoccur.

Program state information may also be available from an intelligentremote control, which will ordinarily have information on the channel orother program setting last set, and which may also have time-positioninformation, or be able to construct such information based on analysisof the commands it issued (as long as there are not intervening controlinputs from another source that the remote is unaware of). From thisperspective, it should be understood that to the extent it is anintelligent command device, such a smart remote can be considered thecontrolling processor for a TV (in parallel with the STB or othercontrol system) for purposes of coordinating activity with anothersystem, with or without special support from the STB. In the case thatan intelligent remote control includes more robust viewing stateawareness, such as in the case of a remote control that provides EPGaccess and viewing control, its ability to serve as a source of stateinformation is enhanced. Other external devices may also be used tosense and transfer the TV state, such as a device that monitors IRsignals from the remote control, or that senses channel indicators onthe TV set or coded into a video image. One method of providing codingof program identifiers or links or other such data within a TV programresource in a form that can be extracted externally even from a standardTV set with no special signaling support, is to insert video-image-basedor audio encoding into the TV program. Such codes may be directlyunderstandable by the local devices as a program or resource identifieror as link arc information or the like, or may be relayed to a remoteservice for interpretation. Other alternative sources of such stateinformation may be DVRs and similar devices, as discussed below.

It will be understood from the discussion of program identificationissues above that when employing basic methods of linkage, currentchannel identification can, in various embodiments of the presentinvention, be used in conjunction with external sources of scheduleinformation to more specifically identify a current program. Such basicmethods of linkage might include, for instance, those that identify acurrent channel but do not directly identify current programs in a morespecific manner.

For example, standard program guide listing information might beemployed in more specifically identifying scheduled programs.Accordingly, particular standard program guide listings might beselected based on knowledge of a particular distribution system servinga user and/or knowledge of the user's time zone, and be referenced bytime and channel to obtain further program identification details.Further sources of external data might be employed to correct for casesin which actual program distributions varied from their plannedschedules. Moreover, such further sources of external data might, invarious embodiments, be employed in identifying advertising programsand/or other programs not listed in standard program guide listings orthe like.

Such further sources of external data might, for example, be obtaineddirectly or indirectly from programmers, advertisers, and/or otherparties. Alternately or additionally, such further sources of externaldata might, for example, be obtained by broadcast monitoring and/orreporting activities, such as those employed in monitoring commercialairings and/or closed-captioning. Such monitoring and/or reporting mightbe done in realtime. It is further noted that such monitoring and/orreporting could be done with respect to any program distribution system,and that a variety of distributions of monitoring systems, as well as ofthe associated data collection and distribution services, might beemployed. A wide variety of such methods will be apparent to one skilledin the art based on the teachings herein, and a number of such methodsare discussed further below.

In addition to identifying state, TV systems also may present challengesin identifying link arcs. As just noted, video may be treated ascontaining links, or as using third-party arcs. In the case of simplevideo, third-party arcs may be obtained in the form of a linkbase, froma TV feed-related source, from the Web or elsewhere, or may be derivedby some other link-like process that leads to a source of associatedmaterial that may be synchronized with the TV program or not.

More advanced systems, such as those employing ATVEF/DASE/DDE, DVB-MHPor similar methods, may embed link arc information into a TV stream,such as using VBI or MPEG, or into related channels such as a DSM-CC,ATSC or DVB-MHP data or object carrousel. In the case of ATVEF, forexample, triggers are embedded into the TV stream as real-time events(called broadcast triggers) that employ the current stream as startingresource and may contain a URL for an ending resource, along with ahuman-readable name, an expiration date, and a script, which is to beexecuted by a trigger receiver object within the ending resource, eitherautomatically or after some user selection. Receiver Web pagescontaining trigger receiver objects are expected to receive and processthe script to cause the desired presentation action. It will beunderstood that this may give an effect generally equivalent to thatdescribed above for encoding automatic triggering behaviors usingactuate attributes, and, unless indicated otherwise or clear fromcontext, any reference herein to one such method of encoding automatictriggers is meant to be inclusive of any other such methods. ATVEF alsoprovides conventions for a Local Identifier URL Scheme (LID) whichserves as a URL relative to a given namespace that can be local to adistribution channel that can be used for resource delivery and that maybe apart from the Internet, such as by broadcast, cable, or satellite.

ATVEF also provides for bindings to the particular channel standardsthat are to be used, for session announcements in accord with SAP andSDP, which may include multicast, and for a Unidirectional HTTP (UHTTP)protocol that adapts HTTP to one-way channels (with provision forseparate back-channels). ATVEF Transport A provides for support of adata return path or back-channel, while Transport B is for one-waybroadcast. One problem with ATVEF and similar real-timelinking/triggering schemes is that they may have difficulty in adaptingto storage and replay of content time-shifted to a time other than theoriginal broadcast. Another problem is that the trigger information, aswell as the associated enhancement resources, may be inaccessible to anindependent system that is to be coordinated, unless it has its ownduplicate TV tuner, STB, and entitlements (even if such access is to beused only in coordination with a TV for a single viewing). Thus,specific URLs might be directly accessible to a TV/STB, and/or to aseparate PC containing a TV tuner capable of receiving ATVEF or similartriggers. However, such link arc information might not be accessible toa separate PC lacking a TV tuner. Moreover, even where a separate PCcontains a tuner, the tuner might need to be manually tuned to the samechannel as that on the TV.

Taking a closer look at ATVEF as an instructive example, it noted thatATVEF provides a protocol for ITV resource presentation to be controlledby triggers transmitted in parallel with a TV program, as announced in asession announcement, with links to enhanced content that may be foundon the Web or staged to the local system via a channel in the broadcastor multicast system. Session announcements are broadcast using a specialSAP and SDP protocols on a single well-known IP multicast address andport to indicate the availability of trigger information and relatedcontent, and (for analog and many types of digital broadcast) specifythe TV broadcast they relate to. The client may present thisautomatically, or on user approval. Only one enhancement is displayableat one time, and ATVEF suggests protocols for determining whethertransitions, controlled by triggers, are automatic or subject to userapproval.

ATVEF does not provide for multiple independent enhancements, or forco-viewing of enhancements. “Only one enhancement may be displayed at atime” (according to ATVEF Specification v1_(—)1 r26, Appendix D). Morespecifically, it is noted that ATVEF is oriented to announcement of a“primary” stream and of corresponding “mutually exclusive variants” thatmay differ in language or attributes such as suitability to varyingdevices. As ATVEF does not provide for multiple independentenhancements, or for co-viewing of enhancements, it may not be suited tothe flexible environment of a PC-class device, as described herein, andits ability to support many windows and frames, the windows and framesperhaps having varying levels of visibility.

With further respect to ATVEF, it is noted that ATVEF triggers include:

-   -   A required URL which refers to the corresponding enhanced        content    -   A name, which is user-readable, and can be used to label a        selection presented to the user    -   A time of expiration, after which the triggered content is to        become unavailable    -   A script attribute, which may execute in a trigger receiver        object within an HTML page, such as to navigate a frame to a new        URL

ATVEF provides that such URLs may be “http:” URLs on the Web, or“uhttp:” URLs receivable over a unidirectional broadcast channel, orlocal “lid:” URLs within a locally cached namespace. HTML pages can becoded to cause a trigger to place a TV frame within a Web page, tooverlay a Web page over a TV background, and to transition from a Webpage back to full-screen TV, and may specify “tv:” protocol links tospecify a channel to be tuned to and presented.

The ETVCookbook page on storage(http://etvcookbook.org/system/storage.html) notes the problem ofstoring enhancement trigger streams for later playback of recordedprograms, and states that ATVEF Transport A triggers in Line 21 or TextChannel 2 can be stored on videotape, but that Transport B cannot, andthat “PC Synchronous enhancements are incompatible with recording. Sincethe content is pushed to the user PC in sync with the broadcast, it willbe out of sync with any playback from a home VCR or PVR. This problemseems to have no solution.”

It is noted that this problem is solved in various embodiments of thepresent invention. For example, the problem can be solved through theuse of a time-based table of triggers and links as outlined above, orother similar methods. Such a table need only be archived with anappropriate identifier and made available at playback time, and thatservice may be readily provided from any of various sources, asdescribed herein. The table entries can be used with a clock-baseddriver to give the effect of a realtime trigger stream, either at theportal or from a local application (such as a browser accessory).

Current 2-box “Enhanced TV” offerings (such as, for example, those fromthe ABC and PBS networks) may be problematic in that they require theuser to know the identity of the current program and to know how tolocate a corresponding resource, which is a Web page for that program,and manually navigate to it, after which the Web enhancements can benavigated with purely temporal synchronization maintained from the Website. For example, for the show “Who Wants to be a Millionaire,” a usermust go to www.abc.com, click a button marked ETV, then pick Millionaire(and then select the time zone). For a similar service produced by ACTVfor MTV2, a user must go to www.mtv2.com. This is obviously awkward andburdensome to the user, and limits the ability of such offerings to gainwide use. It is further complicated by the fact that the user may beunaware of the existence of such a page, and that there is no consistentpattern for how different program sources make such pagesavailable—there are no navigation conventions that are common to manyprograms. It is evident from the teachings provided herein that thisshould preferably be supported as an automated link traversal that couldrelieve the user of these tasks and the need for related navigationknowledge, and that is responsive to the dynamics of channel surfing,swapping, video-on demand, trick play, picture-in-picture usage,personalized ads or other content, and/or similar features. Priorso-called “synchronized TV” schemes can be thought of as providing arelatively “dumb” form of synchronization, and one of the benefits ofthe methods described herein may be to enable a “smart” synchronizationthat remains coordinated with an individual user's TV activity.

An alternative embodiment could make use of a table of associations thatcould serve as a simple linkbase to allow automated traversal from theTV program to the Web-based enhancements. Such a linkbase could bepre-defined by the user, or preferably obtained from the Internet orsome other service. Still other embodiments might obtain such linkbasesfrom other sources, such as embedded in the TV distribution feed, muchas for ATVEF. This method can avoid the problems of need for access tothe TV signal to obtain link arcs, and of time-shifted viewing notedabove.

In particular, such a linkbase could be structured similarly to an EPG.This could exploit the simple basic structure of the EPG as being atwo-dimensional data array, with one dimension being time and one beingchannels, that is readily searched by those two keys. To use such astructure for a linkbase is just a matter of logically placing the linkarcs for a given time and channel in the corresponding grid slot. Thiscould be done in a separate EPG-like structure, or integrated into anEPG and possibly distributed by the same services that provide EPGs.Multiple arcs could appear within a given grid slot, with startingresource information that narrows them to specific sub-intervals or tospecific time/region portions of the resource, and with other attributesthat permit selection of alternative links based on defined parametersand filters, such as to personalize links based on a user profile, or togive users a choice. This method of providing a collection of link arcshaving time-interval attributes (start and end times for enabling thelink, relative to time position in the starting resource) serves as amore flexible alternative to the sending of link arc triggers inreal-time. The effect of real-time triggers can then be derived byprocessing the linkbase in a sequence that is in accord with thetime-interval attributes.

Such EPG-like linkbase structures can be composed at multiple levels,for example, one at the program and channel level, with multiplealternative links as just described, one at the feed source level,including all channels from a given distribution source, such as a cableor satellite system or an Internet streaming service, and one aggregatelevel that combines multiple such distribution sources into a broadersuite. Such linkbase portions may be acquired pre-assembled, much as foran EPG, or some may be dynamically constructed from various sources andwith updates in real time. In certain embodiments, a linkbase managerprogram might be used to assemble and maintain this linkbase structure,in conjunction with one or more external linkbase supply services.

To better accommodate programs that are not appointment viewing andsynchronized to a given real time, but can be obtained on demand in somerecorded form at flexible times, an alternative to the time-based EPGstructure is a one-dimensional table keyed on program identifier orresource address (such as names, URLs, URIs, and the like). As DVRs andsimilar devices proliferate, most or all TV programming may tend to fallinto this category after its first availability. This may be moderatedby the use of time-phased release windows, such as currently used withmovies, that could restrict viewing, copying, and VOD access for someinitial periods. In any case, such a structure can be used incombination with the EPG-like version to provide a flexible combinedlinkbase system that can be searched either by a definitive and uniqueprogram identifier, or by a time and channel combination.

It should be noted that current methods of embedding links into TVprogram transmissions (such as ATVEF) can be limiting, and thatprovision of linkbase metadata in a format that is separable from theassociated TV/video program mediadata encoding can facilitate moreflexible use of the linkbase, such as to facilitate use with storedprograms. Whether provided as a complete linkbase, or locally assembledduring reception of a linkbase stream, such a table need only bearchived with an appropriate identifier and made available at playbacktime. The table entries can be used by a clock-based event driver toreconstruct a realtime trigger stream on demand, either from a remoteserver or from a local application (such as, for example, using abrowser accessory).

Also, reflecting the wide range of possible linkbase embodiments, it ishelpful to think of linkbases as possibly being virtual, in that theymay not be physically assembled into a single data structure of the sortjust described, but that the effect of such a structure is obtained bysome process of finding and using link arc data based on time andchannel identifiers, based on unique program resource identifiers, basedon link arcs being supplied with the program, or any other suitableprocess, and that certain embodiments could work with any suitable formof virtual linkbase and any suitable data structure. Such a virtuallinkbase might also be embodied purely as a process, such as in the formof a resolution service that resolves program identifiers into link arcs(or linkbases), acting much like a name resolver that given a startingresource identifier returns one or more ending resources (along withother link arc supporting information).

It should also be understood that multiple alternative sources oflinkbases relating to a single base program may be accessible, possiblyfrom multiple providers, and that viewers might be given controls todetermine which one or more linkbases are to be applied at any givenmoment or time-span or anchor position, with what priority amongselected alternatives, including controls for passive (automated andimplicit) or active (explicit by the user) selection of alternative linkarcs at the time of link traversal, as well as preference-settingcontrols to pre-set such choices. Such alternative linkbases may beorganized into linkbase channels, and the controls might operate as“linkbase channel” (LC) and/or “enhancement channel” (EC) selectorcontrols that operate much like a secondary selection to theconventional program channel selector control. Thus the user might firstselect a program channel, and then select one or more linkbase channelsto be applied. In addition to applying such linkbase channel settings onan ongoing basis, further or alternative functions might provide foruser selection at the time of link activation from a set of linkscorresponding to alternative linkbase channels. For example, this mightbe controlled using a drop-down list control or a cascading set ofdrop-downs.

It should be understood that transfer requests could be structured toprovide for one set of linkbases to be active at one device set, withanother set of linkbases active at a different device set, with thelinkbase selection being included as part of the state set. This couldfurther exploit the power of MMUIs to allocate interaction withdifferent sets of linkbases to different device sets, such as toallocate tightly coupled and non-intensive linkbase channels to the TVand loosely coupled but perhaps more intensive channels to a PC. Access,selection, and resolution of alternative linkbases may be facilitated byservers acting as linkbase proxy servers. Specific methods will beapparent to those skilled in the art based on the teachings providedherein, such as using methods similar to those described by Page, et.al., Its About Time: Link Streams as Continuous Metadata, at Hypertext'01, incorporated herein by reference.

Thus a transfer from the TV could assume that the PC needs only basic TVstate as a starting resource to identify a third-party arc and establisha “transferred” browsing session with the corresponding ending resource.That ending resource might be a resource (such as a Web page) that isgeneric to the program (whether the specific program episode, or allepisodes of a series), or one specific to the current time span within aprogram, or more specifically to a current time and an indicated imageregion. In the case that the arcs are embedded in the TV feed, thosearcs may be interpreted at the TV, and could be followed there to viewenhancements there, or could be passed to the PC or other device set aspart of the state at the time of transfer. Alternatively, the targetsystem could have access to the same links or linkbases, and enhancementresources, either directly, or via the TV system.

As use of DVDs, DVRs, Internet streamed video, or other similaralternative video sources becomes common, the DVD, DVR or computer orother controlling resource access device may sometimes serve as analternate device to the TV/STB in controlling what is viewed on the TV.In such cases, the session transfer activity might originate from thatdevice, rather than the TV/STB (or in combination with it), and themethods described herein in the context of control by a STB should beunderstood as applicable to DVDs, DVRs or other similar devices as well.This may facilitate implementation of coordinated services for thosecases, since providers of those devices may be more open to addition ofthe coordination support software, or the user may have direct abilityto add such software. In the case of a DVR, for example, the DVR couldcreate and forward the state record as described above, activated byeither a push or pull request. DVD and DVR function and Internet streamaccess can be readily provided on standard PC systems that offerconsiderable extensibility. That also means that centralized, singleprocessor/single system embodiments, as described below, may also bereadily applicable in those cases, although in many cases it may bepreferable that two separate systems be dedicated to video and PCfunctions. It is further noted that with DVRs, a common usage mode is tohave even live programming (such as from cable, satellite, or broadcast)be obtained through the DVR (to enable pause, and other specialfeatures), and such practice may extend to Internet-sourced programs aswell (and DVRs can include DVD players), so that coordination from a DVRmay be applicable to most or all content viewed. The above discussion oflinkbase information is also relevant to content stored on a DVR orother local storage, and such linkbases may be stored with the videocontent (embedded or separately), or may be obtained from anothersource.

Video content streamed over a network (such as the Internet) can betreated in much the same way as from conventional TV distributionsources. Embodiments of linkbases may be embedded, in separate streams,or separately sourced.

It will be understood that some simplification of the methods describedherein for smart synchronization can be applied, for instance, in thespecial case where links are supplied in association with a video stream(e.g., in the case of ATVEF) and where that same stream can be madeavailable synchronously to an alternative device set (e.g., in the caseof a PC containing a TV tuner that can receive the same signals as a TV,including the same links). In such a case, the second device set needonly be tuned to the same channel to receive links that are supplied incommon synchronization with that channel on the TV. In such anembodiment, the smart-synchronization task can be understood as one ofeffectively ganging the tuners in each device set, such that when onechanges channels, the other changes correspondingly, without need forany manual coordination action by the viewer. Thus the state recordmight in some embodiments be as simple as an indication of the currentchannel, to be sent whenever a channel change is made, and the importprocess might consist of using that state record information to mirrorthe channel change, and then, at the PC, to set up browsing based on useof the links provided in association with the designated channel.Similarly, if a TV were driven by an Internet video stream havingassociated links, then synchronization of a PC could, for example, beachieved by causing the PC to receive the same Internet stream on asimultaneous basis, and then drawing upon the corresponding linkassociations that that stream provides. Embodiments might include a widerange of selective controls over when and how such ganging andcoordination is to occur, such as those of the kind described below.

The various forms that linkbases might take, and how they might beapplied in various embodiments of the present invention, will now befurther discussed.

A linkbase might generally be thought of as relating a program to aseries of triggers and/or links keyed to time. Such can be implementedin a variety of ways, including, for example:

-   -   Conventional ITV hyperlinking approaches, such as those in the        ATVEF standard, in which URLs or other kinds of links and        triggers are embedded in the content stream or in an associated        realtime stream.    -   Multiple streams of triggers specifying alternate URL links        might be separately identified and transmitted.    -   Indirect coupling of such streams of triggers to any number of        alternative sets of links might be enabled by abstracting these        triggers to carry a generic trigger identifier instead of a        specific URL, to be used with a mapping table of alternate URLs        associated with the triggers.    -   A similar mapping effect based on the broadcast stream might be        implemented by using a proxy service to translate from the        original primary enhancement trigger URLs to a set of        corresponding alternative URLs.    -   Instead of a trigger stream, this linkbase information be        abstracted into a time-based table of times and triggers, or        other similar data structures, as described above.

In any case, if the original source has made efforts to identify andspecify appropriate points of interaction in an associated triggerstream, this information can be exploited in adapting the trigger streamto specification of an alternative set of enhancements. A time-basedtable permits a simple decoupling from the primary content stream andmight offer a more concise specification, but a mapping based onATVEF-style realtime URL trigger stream might exploit the broadcastingof the original content triggers. The particular choice of these orother similar methods may depend on a wide range of technical,infrastructure, content sourcing, business, and other factors, in waysthat will be apparent to one skilled in the art based on the teachingsherein.

TV Programs as Hypermedia Resources

It should be noted that some issues arise with regard to the uniqueidentification of TV programs (and similar non-Internet resources)relating to ambiguity and imprecision in conventional naming andlocating methods. These issues relate to the identification of link arcsoriginating from a TV resource, and also relate to the reverse problemof linking to a specific TV program. Unlike Internet URIs, URNs, andURLs, a reference to a TV program by channel and time may not be preciseand unambiguous, since it refers to a time slot that only loosely andunreliably corresponds to a specific content resource entity, which maybe broadcast early or late or not at all. Current issues in identifyingTV in a hypermedia context arc summarized in TV Broadcast URI SchemesRequirements (W3C Note 21 Oct. 1999) which distinguishes a four layerhierarchy of service, event, component, and fragment and two dimensions,one schedule-related and one content-related. That note describeslocating methods based on EPG-style channel and time, by query to aservice based on a partial description, by reference to storedresources, and various other cases relating to data carousels orencapsulated IP datagrams, as well as others, and notes that“technology-dependent” content identifiers such as SI (systeminformation) data in the broadcast system are not satisfactory. Howeverthe problem remains that the vagaries of broadcast may make standardschedule-related identifications unreliable for content identificationpurposes. Broadly speaking, much of the difficulty comes from thehistory of broadcast as a channelized push medium oriented toappointment viewing under full distributor control, as opposed tohypermedia as primarily open pull under user control, and it can beexpected that the two will be harmonized, with both orientations beingsupported in an overall context that is more Web-like. Such a moreWeb-like resource identification approach may be useful for currentWeb-based Internet streaming, and may be similarly applicable to VOD orother on-demand or personalized services, whether via cable, satellite,Internet, or other distribution methods.

It can be expected that globally unique content identifiers, such as,for example, CRIDs, ISANs, or V-ISANs, will ultimately be usable for TVprograms, and that in the interim, useful sets of non-standard andnon-unique content identifiers used in various broadcast systems, suchas SI information, can be used in conjunction with system identifiersand other supplementary information to precisely identify specificcontent resources. For purposes of ITV and similar hypermedia, suchprecise identification (serving more or less effectively as auniversally unique identifier, UUID or globally unique identifier, GUID)may be practical and desirable, even if system specific, and it may bedesirable to employ such identifiers for coordinating systems and devicesets in accord with the methods described herein. Thus in identifyingthe state of a TV system, it may be desirable to obtain and transfersuch SI or similar information, and in some cases the use of time andchannel identifiers may be unnecessary.

This issue of precise resource identification may be important toprecise control of coordinated viewing. Simple channel orstream-oriented identification of a resource may not well suited toproviding specific control of a resource that is to be presented on atransfer. For example, such identification may not be fullydeterministic as to whether the resource that will be found in a channelor stream at the time of activation (or at a specified time) will reallybe the resource that was named, or some other resource that happened toappear. For example, a request to transfer the same channel whilewatching one program, might occur as a program change (or commercialinterruption) occurred, and cause some other program to appear instead.In simple cases of continuing viewing, this may not be a seriousproblem, but if the desire was to begin interaction with a program thatjust ended, the desired function might be impossible. Thus in linking toan enhancement with another device set as target (especially if usingthird-party arcs), it may be desirable for the behavior to ensure thatthe current program at the source device set be treated as the startingresource for a link traversal to be completed at the target device set.Similarly, as noted above, and as is a known problem with DVRs, arequest to activate a resource at a given time may not obtain thedesired resource. (This is different from the problem of URLsdisappearing or having changed content, in that the URL preciselycorresponds to a single, entire, discrete resource, even if the identityof the resource is not guaranteed to be invariant. Further, when aresource is substituted at a given URL, that is usually intended to betreated as a valid substitution.) By using hypermedia-style link arcreferences that identify programs by a precise logical or physicalidentifier, these schedule-related ambiguities can be avoided, and moredesirable and stable linking behaviors may be obtained.

A similar issue relates to the expected behavior on loading a resource.In a TV context, it is generally assumed that one tunes in to a programin progress in real time, and starts viewing from some more or lessprecise “current” point, except in the case of the newer, secondaryalternative of video on demand. In a hypermedia context, it is morecommon to expect the reverse, that a video resource will be viewed ondemand, from the exact start, with realtime streams being a secondaryalternative. A harmonized model might provide for consistent defaultbehaviors, using consistent rules for whether a program is activatedfrom the start (such as time=start) or from a current point as default(such as time=now), and for whether a user can override that, in aneffect similar to using a DVR to time-shift and pause broadcastprograms. Resources might be identified as having either a realtime oron-demand presentation type that is coded in byauthor/producer/distributors, and which may be subject to override bythe user. For example, a live Olympic broadcast might be normallyactivated in realtime, but with a simple command variation, activated atthe start of the program. Similarly, alternative camera angles mightdefault to realtime, but have overrides to start at one or morereference points, for an instant (or not so instant) replay effect. Thesame can apply to loosely related or unrelated enhancements, some ofwhich may default to realtime, and some not. A simple convention in linkappearance or in link activation controls might be used to indicate tothe viewer whether a link was coded for realtime or on-demand entry, sothe user could better decide whether to accept or override.

Such codings may also indicate whether the realtime start is inreference to some external broadcast or other event, in which case itmight revert to non-realtime at the end of that broadcast interval, orin relative time reference to some other stream, in which case thatrelative reference might remain in effect. Thus tuning to the Olympicsthe next morning might start it at the beginning of the previous night'sprogram, but any internal relative references might play in synch withthe reference (such as alternative camera angles synchronized to themain program). These codings might take forms such as time=now-absolute,time=now-broadcast, time=now-relative to resource name. With a full setof codings and browsing controls, any combination of link traversals andtime bases can be provided for (with control by user, author, or somecombination), such as, for example 1) from stream A (at time=t), actuatestream B from either time=t or time=0, on either the same or adesignated device set, or 2) from stream A (at time=t), actuate anotherpresentation of A on another designated device set, at either time=t ortime-0, or 3) from stream A (at time=t) on the TV, actuate linked streamB on the remote control/tablet, at either (specified) time base, or 4)from stream A (at time=t) on the remote control/tablet, actuate linkedstream B on the TV, at either (specified) time base, or 5) from discreteresource C on the TV (such as an enhancement text screen), actuate someresource D (continuous with any specified time base, or discrete) on theremote control/tablet, or 6) from discrete resource C on the remotecontrol/tablet (such as an enhancement text screen), actuate someresource D (continuous with any specified time base, or discrete) on theTV, and any other similar combination. Similar controls and codings canrecommend, override, and determine how presentations of startingresources are to behave after a traversal, such as whether they are tocontinue running on their current time base, or to be paused whileenhancements or alternative resources are viewed, and then resumed fromthe last time position. Such a continuation could give an effect such asthat of a conventional advanced TV change of camera angle while such apause could give an effect such as that of an interpolated enhancementas defined above. The use of time parameters as just described, or usingsimilar methods, enables specification (by user and/or author) of a richvariety of behaviors, including all of the variations after Behrenslisted above.

It should be noted that in certain embodiments synchronized enhancementsmight be based on resources, such as HTML pages, that could ordinarilybe discrete, but that have a time-based synchronization imposed on themthat could qualify them as continuous resources. With regard to thecontrol methods just described, these can be considered as havingelements that behave as discrete resources within the bounded timesegments in which they are active. It may be desirable to give the userthe ability, using controls similar to those described above, to controlwhether such resources are presented in accord with their suggestedsynchrony to a related base program, or to decouple that time-basedbehavior to support asynchronous browsing.

These methods can be understood as supporting viewing of streams in“hypertime.” Hypertime can have flexible connection to realtime, andhypertime for each resource may be related to hypertime for otherresources in flexibly linked ways. Just as a user traverses a hypermediaresource tree in (path) ways he defines, based on recommendations andoptions that are authored in, he traverses hypertime trees correspondingto those resources in (temporal) ways he defines, based onrecommendations and options that are authored in. Details of anexemplary set of hypermedia timing controls are provided in the W3Cdocumentation on “The SMIL 2.0 Timing and Synchronization Module.” Thiscan be contrasted to conventional advanced digital TV, which includesmultistream elements such as alternate camera angles and synchronizedenhancements that can be switched to or swapped, but without truehypermedia browsing controls. In that case the user can only selectviewing options as a passive observer, with no temporal control,selecting among views that occur independent of his observation (exceptfor the possible option to apply trick play functions once such a viewbegins). An author similarly has limited flexibility to offer orrecommended options, and essentially edits elements into a single, fixedtemporal stream (or set of parallel streams). In hypertime, the user candraw on rich and flexible author-coded recommendations, and, if givensuitable browsing controls, can actively determine whether availableviews are activated and “real-ized,” and on what time-base, in acustomized, personalized reality. Hypertime is defined by its navigationand control path, and is stateful with regard to time, involving rich,multidimensional state in terms of specific resources, time-bases, timereference linkages, and history and path of resources viewed.Conventional advanced TV simply flows as streams, and is generallystateless with regard to time—apart from a simple channel history, stateinformation is not material (except to the extent that DVR/VODfunctionality provides a simple, limited offset, or “time-shift” fromrealtime). Hypertime can be understood as essentially a full virtualreality with regard to time (and may include natural video and realtimeelements), while conventional video is medium that is essentially inrealtime.

From this perspective some discussion of various senses of the term“realtime” may be helpful. One sense relates to the nature of the timebase. Unless indicated otherwise or clear from context, the term“realtime” as used herein with respect to time base may be thought of asrelating to a universal, common, standard base in absolute time (e.g.,in the case of a live camera or microphone), or as relating to one ofpossibly multiple time bases shared among multiple viewers (e.g., in thecase of an appointment viewing broadcast by a particular distributor ofcontent that might be pre-recorded). It is in these aspects regardingthe nature of the time base that realtime is contrasted herein fromhypertime.

However, “realtime” is also used herein in a second sense, with respectto the degree of synchronicity with regard to nearness of events intime, as exemplified by common usage of hard realtime or near-realtimeas implying a high degree of nearness, and not necessarily implying anyreference to the nature of the time base, whether “real” or not. It willbe understood from the teachings herein that methods and issues relatingto synchronicity or nearness in many cases differ little, if at all, incases of synchronicity relating to a real time base or in cases ofsynchronicity relating to a hypertime base. For simplicity ofexposition, those methods are, at various points, described herein usingthe term “realtime” in this second sense, and the relevance of thosemethods to synchronicity in hypertime is meant to be included as may beappropriate to the context. For example, unless indicated otherwise orclear from context, methods described as relating to realtime triggerstreams can, in various embodiments, be applicable to trigger streamsoperating with reference to any appropriate time base, including thevirtual time bases of hypertime.

Consistent with this, EPG functionality is currently grafted ontoadvanced TV as a different kind of element, one that is not a stream(and does not contain streams) but which can point to a stream. In termsof hypermedia, however, EPGs are just compositions of resources: EPGfunctionality is just a link from a resource, resources can be streamsor discrete, and such links are essentially the same whether they comefrom streams or from discrete resources like text.

Thus, in principle, any suitable set of hypermedia resources couldpotentially serve a program selection task, and thus could serve as anEPG. Continuing in this spirit, it will be further understood that thebasic program guide functions might extend in a variety of dimensionsbeyond the currently common embodiment of an EPG, with typical emphasison a time-channel grid of programs. Such extensions might includevarious structured listing formats based on genre or personal interestcategories, less structured hypermedia formats (e.g., flexible graphstructure formats), formats that integrate with media assetmanagement/library/archive system functions, including assets storedlocally, such as in a media server, and those stored remotely, such asin a VOD service or on the open Internet, formats offering advancedrecommender and agent services, viewer-community-generatedguide/selection/rating information, and the like. Further, the entireopen Web might be employed as a program guide. Unless stated otherwiseor clear from context, the term “EPG” will be meant to be inclusive ofany electronic data structure that provides a program guide function.Thus it should be understood that all of the methods and embodimentsdescribed herein for ITV or hypermedia browsing are meant to beinclusive of any form of EPG application, and of any other particularapplication of hypermedia.

System and Communications Configuration Alternatives

According to embodiments of the invention, the specifics of thecommunications among coordinated devices may vary depending on theavailable and installed network technologies. As described, it may bedesirable that embodiments be based on full-function home networks,conforming to standards such as UPnP and HAVi or the like, and usingsystems that include (or are modified to include) software support forthe methods described herein. These networks may offer open andpotentially universal connectivity, along with rich support services,and such systems can exploit that connectivity to provide the desiredMMUI capabilities, as described. Unfortunately, wide use of such networksolutions may not be readily available due to technical and businessconstraints, and alternative configurations may be needed to provide thedesired MMUI functions. A variety of representative cases and methodsrelevant to ITV services are outlined in the section just below, and itmay be apparent that similar methods can be applied in other variations.

Referring now to FIG. 7, therein is a schematic abstracting elements ofFIG. 1 which may clarify some typical application environments withregard to the connectivity that may be preexisting or added in certainembodiments of the invention. FIG. 7 a depicts a case of full,bi-directional connectivity such as might be typical in an embodimentbased on a digital cable service to and from the TV 130, a HAN or otherlocal connection between the TV and PC 140, and full network 120connection to and from the PC. Network 120 may be, for instance, theInternet and/or any combination of networks that might interconnectbi-directionally, including the Internet 124, wireless network 126,cable, or other content/connectivity 110. The local connection might bepre-existing for various reasons, or added to support the methodsdescribed herein. For sake of simplicity, optional local storage 160 isnot shown in the figure.

FIG. 7 b depicts a case in which the local connection between the TV 130and PC 140 is lacking, as may be common in many homes at present. FIG. 7c depicts a case in which the back-channel from the TV 130 to thenetwork 120 is lacking or limited, such as, for example, by beingintermittent and/or costly, perhaps in terms of connectionestablishment, duration, bandwidth, and/or reliability. This may becommon in current DBS satellite systems, older cable systems, ortraditional broadcast TV systems, such as those using a dial-upback-channel. These alternatives are relevant to selected embodimentsdescribed herein, and based on those examples, similar methodsapplicable to other variations will be apparent to one skilled in theart. For example, one such variation might involve the use of a remotepath in one direction, and a local path in the other, such as in thecase that state control messaging from a PC to a TV is conveyedremotely, but state information from a TV to a PC is obtained locally,or vice versa.

Consideration of alternative configurations can be viewed in terms of atleast two dimensions of variation, one being the hardware, software, andcommunications configurations of the relevant systems to he used toeffect the MMUI at the user location, and another being the nature ofthe hypermedia or ITV service with regard to how resources are organizedand accessed. Details of what state is needed and how it is transferredmay vary somewhat from case to case. Further, in some cases, commonaccess to resources by all cooperating systems may not be a standardcapability and may require special support or work-arounds.

With regard to base TV and video content resource sourcing alternatives,some possible cases include:

-   -   TV: Sourced through the TV source (such as currently intended        for TV use)    -   IP: Sourced from the Internet (such as currently intended        primarily for PC use)    -   Stored: Stored forms on disk, DVD, DVR—generally follow similar        patterns to original sources, but may introduce additional        issues    -   Flexible (parallel-source): Proposed herein as combined sourcing        through either the TV source (broadcast, cable, satellite, etc.)        or the Internet, as well as possibly also on stored media, and        preferably designed to be used on either TV or PC—this may        include IP streams within a DTV/DVB context.

With regard to enhancement content resource sourcing alternatives, somepossible cases include:

-   -   TV: Sourced through the TV source, intended for TV use    -   IP: Sourced from the Internet, intended for PC use    -   Stored: Stored forms on disk, DVD, DVR, could follow similar        patterns to original sources, but being stored may introduce        additional issues, such as loss of live interaction with others    -   Flexible (parallel-source): Proposed herein as combined sourcing        through either the TV source or the Internet, as well as        possibly also on stored media, and preferably designed to be        used on either TV or PC.

The sourcing of the base TV or video and the enhancements may be commonor mixed. One mixed case is that of TV sourced video with Internet (IP)sourced enhancements. It should also be understood, that the linebetween TV and IP sourcing can blur when IP is used within a TVdistribution infrastructure, such as embedded into MPEG streams, or inDOCSIS, or the like. For purposes of applying the methods describedherein, key variations relate to whether both kinds of content resourcesare directly accessible to all systems being coordinated, and if not,whether one is to be relayed to another, or the systems may be limitedto presentation of only the resources they have independent access to.For example, current two-box ETV service offerings represent a casewhere the video is generally viewed only on the TV system and theenhancements are generally viewed only on the PC system, unless the PCis configured with a TV tuner as a PC-DTV combination system, or the TVis configured with Internet access and a Web browser. Variouscombinations of the methods described herein can be used to addincreasing levels of coordination to such offerings. It may bedesirable, however, to provide flexible parallel sourcing, by makingequivalent enhancement resources available via both the TV signal andthe Internet.

It will be understood that the form of the state record and how it iscreated might also take many alternative embodiments, depending on whatdata is most readily obtained. For example, in some cases data might beobtained in terms of channel tuned to, along with information on otherviewing controls such as time-shifting that govern what content isviewed. In other cases, data might be obtained from the playing of theprogram itself, such as from identification data received in associationwith the program and/or from data sensed or recognized within theprogram. Such identification data might include, for example, any of theidentification data noted above.

With regard to the hardware, software, and communications configurationsof the relevant systems at the user location, some representativepossible cases include:

-   -   ClosedSTB: A proprietary and closed STB without special        provision for obtaining state information and with constraints        on modifying software to add MMUI functions (typical of current        STBs)    -   OpenSTB An open STB (or advanced TV) that offers all STB        functions and allows coordination functions to be included with        flexible linkage to PCs via gateway capabilities (possibly as a        third party modification), such as an STB conforming the        OpenCable specification and including its POD module        capabilities, or the like.    -   CooperatingSTB: A closed STB that cooperating operators and        vendors may permit to have the same coordination features as        might be provided in the open STB    -   LiberatedSTB: A combination of a closed STB with external        facilities to extract or duplicate state information to support        MMUI coordination, possibly without any cooperation from STB        manufacturers or system operators    -   ControllableSTB: A closed STB with the addition of signaling        terminations for remote control signals to facilitate relaying        of control actions, and for non-composited video-out and        enhancement-content-out to facilitate relaying and filtering of        content. (Such a case might be desired by system operators to        facilitate external provision of the coordination function,        without risking compromise of access controls or software        integrity.)    -   PC-DTV-Open: A PC that drives a TV, with OpenSTB function, which        can be used as equivalent to OpenSTB, but can also provide full        PC function directly integrated with TV functions, allowing a        centralized coordination embodiment (PCTV-Central)    -   PC-DTV-Closedout: A PC that drives a TV, but which (lacking        OpenSTB with POD module features) cannot receive encrypted cable        or satellite services (except as slave to a separate STB)        (typical of current PC-DTV systems)    -   Coordinating-Remote: The usual dedicated remote control could be        replaced by a PDA (or tablet or other PC-like device) that has        IR (or other suitable) signaling capability and is programmed to        act as the remote, thus allowing integration of the liberator        functions with the remote control and optionally with the target        PC/PDA device (i.e., itself or another device).    -   DVR/Gateway-Controlled: In TV configurations with a DVR or        full-function gateway, the primary control of video viewing may        be from that external device, allowing the coordination function        to be placed there, as described above.

Issues in selecting among such embodiments involve a wide range oftechnology, business, legal and regulatory issues, especially withregard to the tight control currently exercised by system operators overthe STBs that connect to their services. Embodiments may be highlydependent on their decisions (and the level of their continuing power)in this complex business/regulatory environment.

It will be apparent that the suggested capabilities of the OpenSTB,CooperatingSTB, and PC-DTV-Open configurations can readily support theaddition (primarily in software) of methods of providing MMUIcoordination functions described above both for unrestricted broadcastTV, and with full access to closed cable and satellite systems using theconditional access features of the STB or an associated POD module-typedevice. Such access to cable and satellite service resources may behighly desirable to a commercially attractive ITV service. TheDVD/Gateway-Controlled configuration is also readily extended tocoordinated use, again primarily in software. As noted previously, whilediscussion herein general follows the conventional split of functionsbetween TVs and STBs for simplicity, embodiments of the presentinvention are meant to apply to alternative distributions of functionbetween such devices, including cases of integrated TV/STB devices. Suchfunctionality might, in some environments, involve duplicativefunctional capability in both an advanced TV and a STB device. In suchcases, even if the STB is not open, intelligence and network facilitiesin the TV receiver or monitor might, in various embodiments of thepresent invention, be applied to support some or all of the coordinationfunctions described for the OpenSTB configuration in a substantiallyequivalent manner.

The LiberatedSTB, ControllableSTB, and Coordinating-Remoteconfigurations are representative of new hardware configurations andassociated methods that provide alternative ways to obtain a range ofmore or less similar functions using current or future equipment thatconstrains access to signals, resources, state information, andcontrols. These methods generally involve measures to:

-   -   intercept control inputs and/or other sensible indications of        state from the remote control to the STB, and inject emulated        remote control signals to the STB    -   apply logic to model the state of the STB based on the available        signals, in order to drive the STB export/import function    -   optionally, obtain program content signal outputs from the STB        and relay them to the external device set.

Such external methods can provide the functions that might have ideallybeen built into the STB. The objective is that they do not impede thefunction of the STB, but add intelligent communication and coordinationfunctions that the STB does not provide for itself. One class of thesemethods, represented by the LiberatedSTB, is based on use of an externaldevice that intercepts signaling from the remote to the STB, such as byusing IR sensors and lamps placed near the STB, much like for currentVCR commander cables from STBs or Cable commander cables from VCRs.Serial cables may also be usable as a control input to the STB, as canHAN connections. IR input directly to the STB could be shut off (such asby physical masking) to avoid uncontrolled signals. The liberator devicecould have sufficient intelligence to model the state of the STB, atleast with regard to the current channel being viewed, and possibly alsoother control details as well, and to communicate that state to thecoordinated device set in either push or pull mode.

That forwarding might be by IR, wireless, or other suitable means.Similarly, the liberator device could be responsive to interpretrequests from the coordinated device set to issue IR, or serial, orother control commands to the TV/STB, such as to change channels orcontrol trick play functions or other advanced features, as appropriate.Given that signaling failures might cause some loss of synchronizationcontrol relay, such losses might, in various embodiments, be correctedby user re-entry of commands. For instance, the user might be cued tothe need for such corrections by display of the last channel change orother control signal. It may be expected that over time, remote controlsmay shift from IR to Bluetooth or other wireless HAN or PAN signaling,and it should be understood that all of the configurations described asrelating to IR are meant to be adaptable to such signaling, and as willbe apparent to one skilled in the art, they may be somewhat simplifiedas a result of the greater flexibility and ubiquity of such networkconnectivity.

Turning now to FIG. 10, therein is depicted a schematic of an exemplaryLiberatedSTB configuration. In addition to the devices shown in FIGS. 1and 2, liberator device 1010 is shown as connecting to the cableconnection between the STB 210 and TV 212. This connection might be aconventional coaxial cable connection, and might interpose the liberatordevice 1010 such that it controls all signals passing to the TV, and caninterrupt, modify, and inject signals to the TV 212 as desired, or inalternative embodiments this might be a passive connection, such asusing a T connector, or absent. Also shown is HAN 128, as distinct fromInternet 124 or other wide area network. Depicted is an exemplarycurrent common configuration wherein a HAN (employing, perhaps, 802.11)is linked to a wide area network (e.g., the Internet 124), and whereinthe two sub-networks are linked via a modem 1030 (e.g., a cable modem, aDSL modem, or a dial-up telephone modern).

For simplicity, STB 210 is shown as connected to the Internet 124,instead of the perhaps more common linkage via, for example, specializedcable or satellite network protocols and facilities. IR input and outputconnections are also shown and indicated by the direction of the arrows.These include an output for remote control 214, which conventionallydrives control inputs at SIB 210, or alternatively at TV 212. Theliberator device 1010 is shown as having an input for tracking thesignals from the remote control 214, and an output for injectingcontrols to the STB 210 and/or TV 212. This output might be on a cable,which might connect to the liberator device 1010 via a USB, 1394 orother suitable connector. It will be understood that a while a HANconnection between the PC/PDA 220 and liberator device 1010 is shown,this might alternatively be a direct cable connection of any suitablekind. It will also be understood that such a direct connection might bemore conveniently made to another nearby device, such as, for example, astandalone or STB-bundled or DTV-bundled cable modem, and that networkconnections might then pass signals to and from the PC/PDA 220. Alsodepicted with dashed lines, as optional variations, are inclusion of HANconnections for the remote control 214, STB 210, and TV 212.

It will be understood that an alternative functional distribution forsuch a liberator method might place most of the coordination controllogic, including that for the modeling of the SIB, in a PC or PDA orother such device—which might also be the processor device that controlsthe coordinating device set—so that the only hardware to be added tosuch standard home devices might be the IR signaling connections, whichin this case might attach directly to the PC/PDA. In such case, aninexpensive adapter device having IR input and output capability andacting as a remote transducer could be employed to link such acoordinating device to the STB.

Such a transducer/adapter might be a simple cable connector, much likecurrent commander or “IR blaster” devices (with the addition of two-waysensing and control), or might convert the IR signaling to a simplenetwork signaling that might link to the PC or other device over awireless network adapter. In the latter case, the adapter might beplaced much like the liberator device 1010 in FIG. 10, but most of thelogic might be in the PC/PDA 220. Such network signaling might conformto relevant standards for sensing and control signals such as, forexample, UPnP or HAVi. Such an adapter might also have broader uses as away to make a non-network aware device, such as a legacy TV or STB, or ahome audio or other entertainment appliance with IR capability,participate in a home network environment at some useful level ofcompliance with relevant standards for sensing and control ofentertainment devices, essentially acting in the role of a proxy for thedevice.

Thus, such a device might act as an intelligent adapter that connects TVand other entertainment devices to PC-type devices over a HAN. Thisadaptation might provide proxy or gateway functions that rely onspecific functional translations based on the intelligence of theadapter and known device functions, or it might be effected in a moregeneral way, such as, for example, a network bridge that adapts at theprotocol level between devices on disparate networks (e.g., betweenwireless 802.11 computer networks and wired 1394 entertainment networks)to hide the differences among networks in performing functions thatwould be supported in a homogeneous network.

It will be further understood that linking adapters similar to thosejust described might also be useful for other purposes, such as fordistributing content from a PC or PC-like media server or storage deviceto a TV or other entertainment device, apart from the session transferand coordination objectives described herein. Thus, for example, video,pictures, or audio stored on a PC might be fed to a TV or audio or hometheater system. In such cases, the PC device might simply drive the TVdevice as a passive presentation device. It might have no need to knowthe current program/session state of the TV, because its only functionis to replace or suspend that.

Network adapter devices might be developed and marketed with thiscapability of passing media content from the PC to the TV as such apassive presentation device, apart from the present invention with itsbi-directional transport of session state information. Such mediaconnection adapter devices might also have IR sensing capabilities forresponding to remote controls, and might further include IR injectioncapabilities for controlling STBs, such as to support DVR functionality(e.g., to select a channel to be recorded).

Should that be the case, it will be apparent to one skilled in the art,based on the teachings herein, that such distribution-oriented adapterdevices might also be extended for used for session transfer andcoordination. Such extensions might simply require the addition ofsoftware to the adapter device to provide the added communicationservices that might enable the network connections provided by theadapter to be used for exchange of state information, preferably ineither direction. In some embodiments, the necessary basic networktransport functions might actually be present in such a product, andneed only to be exploited by suitable software in the PC and TV toexport and import state through that lower-level network facility.

For example, in the case of a TV/STB or other entertainment device thatsupports remote command and control (e.g., via UPnP, HAVi, and/or thelike), the PC might simply use those command and control features toread current states and to coordinate its own sessions and alter the TVsessions accordingly. In the case of a less capable TV/STB, the adaptermight monitor remote control signals from the TV remote to detectchannel changes, and might also be caused to insert commands to the STB,as described above. In such cases, software might need to be added tosuch a media play-oriented adapter to add these desired controlfunctions, or it might be possible to piggyback on similar functionalitythat might be provided to support standard DVR control functions. Inother cases, addition of an IR blaster to support command injectionmight also be required. Depending on the openness of the softwareenvironment provided by such products, and on the presence ofconnectors, such as 1394 or USB or the like, such additions might besuitable for aftermarket upgrades that can be installed by consumers.

It will be understood that other devices that might be employed in homesin conjunction with televisions might also provide a useful base forproviding the functions just described. These might include, for exampleDVRs, gateways, game machines, home theater controllers, and the like.The case of a DVR/Gateway is described in particular, below. A gamemachine might become interesting for such use, for example, in the casethat the machine has a tuner or equivalent facility for accessing TVprogram content that might pass through it from STB to TV and aconnection (e.g., an Internet connection) that can link it to the PC/PDAto be coordinated. Such a configuration might then be augmented withsoftware, and possibly the addition of an IR output suitable forcontrolling the STB, to provide the liberator functions described above.

Other methods might also be usable to capture state information,potentially including any kind of sensor that can obtain informationthat can be used to determine a current channel or program, or torecognize any actions that change such selections. Such methods might bebased, for example, on data intended to identify a program, or on dataor features that are characteristic of a particular program. Examples ofthe former are identification coding methods, such as those listedabove, and might include NIELSEN AMOL data in the VBI, or V ISAN orother digital metadata. An example of the latter is monitoring of thesound or image or light from the TV to recognize a current program orad.

For example, the content-based ID technology used for broadcastmonitoring of the airing of advertisements by specialized services foradvertisers, such as, for example, AUDIBLE MAGIC or IDIOMA, might beadapted to use within homes. Another alternative is technology of thesort used by SHAZAM to enable cell phone callers to have a currentlyplaying song identified, even in high noise environments such as bars.Such methods might be adapted to use a microphone connected to theuser's PC to capture the current program audio, convert it locally atthe PC to a signature based on attributes of the sound pattern, and sendit to a central portal or other server facility for determination ofwhat program it corresponds to, based on searching a database ofprograms for the matching signature. While such methods might be appliedcontinuously, more selective matching might, in various embodiments, bemore efficient.

In some cases, such databases might be maintained for other purposes,and thus be made available for this use at relatively low cost. Suchrecognition might be particularly efficient, for instance, forappointment viewing (e.g., viewing of scheduled programs), since theviewer sample and the source samples would be known to havesynchronization, and could be captured and compared in real time withjust a short trailing window. For example, a short segment that wasbroadcast a few seconds ago could be compared to segments that werecaptured at the viewer's location a few seconds ago.

It might, for various embodiments, be preferable that such methods bepassive, non-intrusive, rely only on content inherent in the program(e.g., metadata that might be included for other purposes), and/or thatthere be no need for cooperation in its production or distribution.However, alternative methods might, for instance, actively insertspecial coded signals that are designed for easy sensing and recognitioninto the program as it is distributed. Such coded signals might include,for example, the image coding used by VEIL INTERACTIVE for TV broadcastverification, the audio coding techniques used by NIELSEN for ratingspurposes, and/or other video or audio coding or watermarking methods.

Active coding might be inserted by program producers, or bydistributors, such as cable or satellite operators, or other parties. Insome cases, such as possibly with the NIELSEN data, such coding might beroutinely available for most or all programs, and thus effectivelynon-intrusive with respect to these methods. Similar techniques might beused to sense and recognize that a channel change occurred, or that aprogram change within a channel occurred, including program transitionsrelating to ads, and thus trigger further matching actions to track thatchange.

Examples might include a momentary silence or empty video frame thatmight occur when digital channels are changed or ads are inserted, or adistinctive sound or light pattern that might occur when analog channelsare changed. Alternatively, such matching might be triggered on demandas a result of some user action. Another similar method might involve apassive monitoring device that can be inserted into the cable path, suchas between the STB and TV, or in front of the STB, to sense video oraudio or control signals that can be used to identify a current program.Such monitoring might relate to an RF or an A/V signal, for example, orto other methods of sensing patterns in digital coding.

Another example of recognition using metadata that is included for otherpurposes might be the use of closed caption data, which could beextracted, relayed, and matched to known programs using methods similarto those just described for recognition of the content itself. Referencedatabases of closed caption data might be maintained for other purposes,and thus available at relatively low cost. Such closed caption data maybe included in the data stream sent from STB to the TV.

In such a case, passive monitoring could readily be applied to extractthe closed caption stream, for example, by duplicating or piggybackingon standard TV receiver functions that obtain such signals, whether in adevice constructed for this purpose, or in a TV or DVR or PC, or otheravailable device. Such passive monitoring might also include extractionof associated time code data. In one embodiment this data might then bepassed, via the PC, to the portal service, which might then match itwith known closed caption streams to determine the program. It will beunderstood that this, and many of the other sensing and/or coordinationfunctions of this kind, might also be built into the TV monitor orreceiver, especially in configurations in which such monitors orreceivers have intelligent processing capability.

Another method of linkage according to various embodiments of thepresent invention could be to use an IR receiver at the PC or PDA (e.g.,the standard IR transceiver commonly included with current PCs and PDAs)to receive standard channel change and other control signals from theremote control to the extent possible. Depending on physical layout, thePC/PDA might be able to receive such signals with more or lessreliability, and might use simple software to recognize the remotecontrol commands, and thus be used to coordinate the PC session activitywith corresponding effectiveness.

Various passive reflector or relay devices and/or shields and/or aimingdevices, and/or other methods might be used to improve such IRcommunication. Employed, for example, could be active relay devices suchas simple repeaters that receive an IR signal and output a correspondingsignal. Further options might apply current and/or simplified enhancedversions of home automation devices, such as the devices offered byXANTECH, NIRVIS SLINK-E, and the like. It will be understood thatvarious methods for relaying infrared or other control signals, such asproprietary schemes that run over various kinds of A/V cables, includingcoax, and S-Link, might also be applied, and that all of thesealternatives might be viewed as various points on a devicecommunications spectrum that extends to more advanced, functional, andstandardized schemes like 1394, DVI, and HDML and network services likeUPnP and HAVi, whether based on wired or wireless links, any of whichmight be used as substantially equivalent for purposes of MMUIcoordination.

Additionally, viewers might be asked to take the further action ofaiming the remote control at the PC/PDA and issuing redundant commandsto facilitate coordination. This re-entry might be employed for commandsthat can be repeated without causing further action at the STB, such asentering a channel number, or other functions such as favorite channel.It might also be workable for commands that do have a cumulative effect,such as channel + or −, or last channel, if the remote can be aimed tonot reach the STB when communicating to the PC/PDA. In this use, thecoordination might be only semi-automatic, and such IR signaling mightbe useful for semi-automated services as described further below.

The ControllableSTB is suggested as a new class of STBs that makevarying degrees of limited provision for coordination function externalto the STB. This could permit STB vendors and system operators to enablecoordination to occur external to their systems, with well-definedinputs and outputs and strictly limited exposure. Such a configurationis also especially advantageous for the case that enhancements areembedded in a TV transmission, and thus not readily accessible directlyby another device set (such as through lack of a tuner and/or lack ofconditional access rights). Outputs from such a device could include 1)detailed control event streams to allow external interpretation,modeling, and reaction, 2) TV signal enhancement trigger or linkbasedata, and 3) full relay of embedded enhancement streams. A method forrelay of all such data could be to convert such data to an IP format andforward it via LAN (wired or wireless), but other output signals andconnector types may be used, including basic A/V or RF out signaling anduse of the 1394 Fire-wire connector included on advanced STBs.

One simple form of relay is to provide a slight modification of astandard STB to open it minimally by providing intermediate outputs foruse by a liberator device. The liberator could be a separate device, orintegrated as a hardware or software-only adapter into a PC or othersystem to be coordinated. Digital TV set-top boxes are routinelyequipped with facilities to connect to a TV source (typically analog ormultiplexed digital QAM) and convert (tune, demux, decrypt, decode, andcompose to A/V or RF output) that signal for use with a TV monitor, butdo not have facilities to make that signal available in a form suited tofurther processing by a PC. The STB uses an internal CPU to compositeadditional elements onto the base video, in response to userinteractivity. The box outputs the resulting composite A/V or RF, butnot the base program A/V or RF or the raw supplementary data obtainedfrom the broadcast signal. It may be desirable to enable selectivepass-through of those additional elements to shield the set-top box fromthe interactions on the PC/PDA system, and separately apply them for thePC/PDA, so that there is no change to the base program A/V or RF on theTV (and further, to allow separate interactions at the TV). Preferablythe PC/PDA interactions could generally not be passed back to theset-top box (except when a transfer to the TV is intended), but ratherprocessed at the liberator, which could then use a separate path to getindividualized ITV enhancement responses without interference to themain TV screen. It may also be desirable that the liberator couldseparately obtain both the basic video and the additional elements (inraw form) from the set-top box, and act as an intelligentsession-sharing device for the TV and PC/PDA. (Separate interactionsintended for the TV could be handled normally by the STB.)

Thus various combinations of ITV outputs for a given program that couldbe useful in different embodiments are 1) the standard A/V or RF outputwith the base program only, for basic TV, 2) a demuxed and decryptedMPEG or similar stream that could give an external liberator or otherdevice access to the content needed for full independent interaction(which might be output to a second A/V or RF connector, or via LAN), andoptionally, 3) a composited signal with the base program, ITV bugs, plusselected enhancements directed to the TV-out as an alternative output,for use when interaction is intended to target the TV (which might beoutput at the standard output connector). This process could be doneseparately for each of 1) the basic TV signal and 2) the supplementarydigital interactive control content that might be coded in a VBI or DTVformat, and 3) any of multiple PIP elements. Such separation can enablethe user to select various combinations of output to either TV monitoror PC (via the liberator or adapter system). Thus with fullpass-through, either device could enter inputs and both devices couldshow a common result screen. With selective pass-through, one usefulsetting could be for PC interactions to cause change only to the PCdisplay, so that it could be used for interactive content supplementaryto the TV program without interfering with the display on the TV.

Similarly, a liberator box could relay remote control signals to thecoordinated device set using the same kind of IR or wireless signalingas the TV remote, as has been suggested above, but it may be preferableto convert those signals into an IP format for communication with the PCover the LAN (802.11, Bluetooth, etc.). This could eliminate the needfor the coordinated device set to receive IR, and can also eliminate theneed for such a device to send it. This is useful, whether for relay, orsimply for a PDA or tablet to act as a remote control without thelimitations (distance, line-of-sight, reliability) of IR signaling. Notethat the use of IR signaling for remote controls may desirably bereplaced by such wireless RF facilities as ultimately being morepowerful, economical, and flexible, just for its conventionalfunctionality, and this could further expand the range of devices thatare readily coordinated.

A configuration suggested as the Coordinating-Remote type can be appliedas a straightforward variation on any of the prior cases, one in whichthe function of the remote is subsumed by a PDA (or tablet or the like).Here the signaling control need not be inserted between the STB andremote control, but can be integrated with the remote control device.The task of making the PDA work as a remote follows the existing exampleof the OmniRemote software for the Palm. Relaying to the PDA (if the PDAis the target device), and shielding of the STB from undesiredinteraction signals can all be done internal to the PDA. In simple suchembodiments, the only need for special support at the STB is for caseswhere a content signal must be passed from the STB (the TV-sourcedcases), and such a device could be simpler than the ones that handlecontrol signaling as well. If the target device to be coordinated issome system other than the PDA that acts as the remote control, thenrelay functions to that device from the PDA/remote could be included asfor the above cases.

As noted above, the DVR/GatewayControlled configuration can be useful insituations such as where a DVR acts as the primary control for a TVsystem. In this case the DVR acts much like a liberator in handling theremote control and driving the STB, and is thus fully aware of and ableto control the key aspects of state in a straightforward manner. The DVRcan be connected to the PC/PDA device through any convenient method.Note that DVRs may in some cases be integrated with the STB, and in somesuch cases they may be more closed in regard to extensibility.

It will be further understood from the foregoing that in a case whereenhancement data is passed from the STB through a “TV” output that isused as input to a DVR/Gateway (which, in turn drives the TV) in a formthat might permit that data to be read by the DVR/gateway, the latterdevice might use that data, as provided, to cause those enhancements tobe displayed on the TV that it drives. For example, enhancement datamight be supplied encoded into an analog TV signal, such as in the VBI,and such enhancement data, having undergone any necessary unscramblingby the STB, using its conditional access features, might then beincluded in the VBI output intended for the TV.

The DVR might next obtain the data out with the VBI, and use it, muchlike a STB ordinarily would, to add enhancement overlays to the TV imagethat it outputs to the TV in composited form, as described above for theliberator. In cases where digitally coded enhancement data is similarlyincluded in the output from the STB, similar use of it by a DVR/gatewaymight be made. It will be understood that in such a usage, aDVR/gateway, or similarly a game system, might act essentially in therole of a STB to control presentation of enhancement resources on theTV, and that such a configuration could be considered in many respectsto be a case of a distributed function STB.

It will be understood, as discussed above, that such aDVR/Gateway-controlled configuration might function with high-levelcoordination intelligence (e.g., comparable to that described for acooperating STB) or with lower levels of intelligence (e.g., in a rolemore like that described for the LiberatedSTB) where the DVR/Gatewaysimply serves as a convenient base for such liberator functions.Accordingly, state information could be obtained and exported at thebrowsing control level, such as channel setting, program selection, andtrick-play command information, and/or sensed at the level of programplay, such as in the sensing of program ID metadata embedded in orassociated with the program currently playing.

Thus, the DVR might, for example, coordinate with the PC/PDA at thelevel of rich state transfer records, relay lower-level state data,and/or relay raw data to be recognized (e.g., closed caption data). Tothe extent that DVRs become widespread, linked into HANs, and/or madeopen to software additions, they might be viewed as an increasinglydesirable base for such coordination functions. It will be understoodthat such use of the DVR as a liberator device could be possible incases where it does not act as the primary TV/STB control device, forexample, because of its capability to monitor the signal passing fromthe STB to the TV, however that is controlled.

An additional variation of interest involves the use of voice control,based on speech recognition, as a replacement for a conventionalkey-driven remote control. This can be done with portable devices suchas the KASHNGOLD InVoca Deluxe, but may also be based on other devices,such as a PC using software such as AUTOMATED LIVING HAL2000. Voiceactivated control based on a PC could be used to drive a TV/STB, andcould optionally also drive functions on the PC. Thus such a PC canprovide the signaling and state management functions for the TV/STB muchas described in connection with the liberator, using only a controlconnection to the TV/STB, such as IR, serial, or wireless LAN. All ofthis could be placed in a laptop or tablet configuration, but forreasons of size, packaging, physical connections, power, and the like,it may be desirable to split functions between such a portable deviceand a base unit, which could be another PC or a special device. Such asplit could be achieved through peer-to-peer connections (preferablywireless), or using a client/server or I/O terminal structure, such asones like those discussed above in connection with intelligent monitorsor tablets. Such a PC-based coordination method could be used with aconventional remote as well, by linking the remote to the PC instead ofthe TV/STB. That could be somewhat awkward with regard to thelimitations of IR signaling, but could be more suitable for a remoteusing other wireless networking.

Given the range of embodiments addressed here, some review of keyaspects of the basic methods may be helpful. Provided that content andcontrol signals are obtainable as described for each case, the commontask remaining is the higher-level control logic that implements theexporter/importer for the STB. (The import/export at the other,computer-type device set is largely independent of these variations.)This requires modeling of the state of the STB, as a surrogate fordirect access to its internal state. A state model is maintained bykeeping track of all control actions, and applying them to a statemachine model that simulates relevant aspects of the logic used by theSTB to present the basic TV and enhancement content. Such models can becreated for each STB type and each ITV programming/sourcing format. Thislogic can be placed within the liberator device, or can reside remotelyat the target system. The latter may be preferable in terms of hardwarecost, and availability of software and network resources to facilitateprogramming and support. In that case, the liberator acts as a simpleperipheral device that relays control signals under the control ofcoordination software in the target system that manages the control ofboth device sets.

Granularity issues also apply much as described previously.Coarse-grained embodiments that only permit migrations at a fewwell-defined interaction entry/exit points are simplest to accomplish,and may be best suited to the constraints of a liberator embodiment. Themixed access case of TV-sourced base video plus IP-sourced enhancementresources could reasonably involve limited support for interaction atthe TV/STB, so the granularity might be correspondingly limited. Thesimplest such cases could just pass the current channel and optionallyan activation signal when interactive functions are desired, and couldalso optionally add relay of TV-sourced trigger events.

It should also be noted that coordination with regard to EPG content(which might be carried in the VBI or DTV broadcast or sourcedseparately) is particularly simple because of the well defined andlimited functions required and its limited, fixed points of coupling tothe TV content, so shifting those functions to an alternative device setis simpler and might be done apart from the more general coordinationfunctions. It is further noted that, in certain embodiments,enhancements and/or other content linked from EPG listings and/orassociated advertising content might also be handled by the methodsalready described. Thus, for example, the EPG might be viewed on the TVand the enhancements on a PC, the EPG, itself might be viewed on a PCand activate primary program viewing on the TV, but enhancement viewingon the PC, or any other combination of targeting that might be desiredat any given time.

An alternate embodiment of the communications required for basiccoordination that may be desirable in the near-term is to do thisthrough external WAN communications as noted earlier. This may beparticularly relevant to early acceptance of ITV to finesse the problemsand delays of funding and completing installation of more advancedsystems. As depicted in FIG. 7 b, many STBs currently installed are notconnected via a LAN to alternate device set candidates such as the PC,but these systems can, instead, be linked via a remote location such asa head-end. These STBs may already have software capable of transmittingcurrent channel and other key viewing event state information to thehead-end, such as to enable tracking of viewing, use of services such asVOD and PPV, and targeting of advertising, and are addressable toidentify the specific STB device. In that case, no new deployment may beneeded, and all linkage and processing needed to provide state recordassembly and transfer could be accomplished at head-end serverlocations. Should that software not be in place, it should be relativelysimple to add it as a software-only upgrade to the existing. STBdevices, perhaps using standard software download/install capabilities.Such externally mediated transfers might be most easily accomplished aspull transfers, but addition of simple software functions at the STB(again, possibly using existing, installed hardware) to supportactivation of push transfers based on simple commands should not bedifficult either. At a more fine-grained level, specific link activationand arc data (including ATVEF trigger data) could be sent from the STBto the head-end for relay to an alternate device set (or caused to besent directly from the head-end).

Such externally mediated coordination could be enhanced by value-addedserver functions. For example, a cable or satellite operator (or otherparty) could operate an Internet portal that mediated the communicationsdescribed by allowing user PCs to log in to a secured account to link tothe state information on the TV (for any of that user's STBs) andrequest pull transfers (or receive push transfers). Such a portal couldhave a scope that covered all channels and programs obtained throughthat operator's service, whether scheduled or on-demand, and couldoptionally include similar data on other resources, such as broadcastchannels, Internet video sources, and digital movies (broadcast or DVD,or whatever), and thus serve as a primary entertainment portal for theuser, and it will be understood that such an entertainment portalservice could be integrated with a general purpose Web portal. Even withvery simple state transfer functions (including push transfers), such acoordination method could be responsive to channel changes, channelsurfing, channel swapping, video on demand, trick-play controls,picture-in-picture viewing, and similar dynamic behavior at the TV, andthus be far more effective than current “two-box” system that employ,for example, manual user entry of program-specific URLs, and whereinthere may be a need to enter time zones and other data on aprogram-by-program basis.

Because of the sensitivity of such detailed viewing data, privacy andsecurity of such data may be vital, and could be assured by both policyand technical measures of kinds well known for such data and Web-basedservices. The basic functions of such security measures are to identifyand authenticate any PC user seeking access to data for a TV, and to usean access control list or similar specification of privileges todetermine that the user at the TV and at the PC correspond to oneanother, at either an individual or family level, as may be desired, orare otherwise to be granted access privileges, with support for the casethat different ID schemes and authentication methods may be used at thedifferent device sets. It should be understood that privacy issues thatwould ordinarily relate to use of such personal data for unauthorizedpurposes, such as for marketing purposes, are not inherently applicable,because in this case the data would be relayed from the user's STB onlyto the same user's PC as a service to the user as data owner, and couldbe restricted from disclosure to any other party and not used by therelay operator for any other purpose.

Nevertheless, there may exposures that call into question the technicaland business integrity of the relay operator. Accordingly, additionalsecurity might be added by restricting any external transmission ofstate information to times that are specifically authorized, such asonly when the coordinating PC is actively logged in and enabled by theauthorized user. This might normally be done in software at either orboth of the PC and the STB, but direct controls could also be providedat the STB, possibly in hardware, to allow a user to shut off all suchtransmissions if desired.

For additional security, encryption could be used in a VPN (VirtualPrivate Network)-like tunneling scheme that is private to the user. Insuch embodiments, the user might control keys at both the STB and PC sothat the portal provider merely relays transfer records without beingable to read them, and all use of those records (e.g., all resultantcontrol functions) are initiated local to the STB or PC. Thus the userat the PC could determine what viewing state information should be usedto request remote resources, if any, and the portal would have noknowledge of viewing activity apart from the receipt of suchuser-controlled requests.

In cases where enhancement linkbase information, such as ATVEF triggers,is embedded in a primary program such PC-controlled requests to theportal could include requests to provide such triggers for a specifiedprogram (optionally with other details such as a time-position), whetheras a consolidated linkbase or as a series of triggers, each of whichcould be pushed by the portal at the appropriate time. It will also beunderstood based on the teachings herein that additional security andauthentication might also be provided by use of a controlled networkenvironment, such as in the case of a cable modem that providesconnectivity to the PC. Employed in such a network environment may behardware addresses and/or IDs, and/or set ranges of network addresses,(e.g., IP addresses) that might be known and/or controlled by a cableoperator or the like.

Referring now to FIG. 8, therein is a schematic depicting exemplaryelements of such a portal. Using the example of a sessioncoordination/relay portal operated in association with a cable TVservice, in this embodiment a conventional set-top box 210 is connectedby cable and/or similar technologies such as HFC to the cable head-end810, which provides access to television content in the form of TVprogramming 850 and/or ads 830. An independent conventional PC 220 isconnected using the Internet and/or any other suitable network to thecable operator portal 820. The portal could include functions of aconventional Web and/or ITV portal, such as to access linkbases and/orstarting resources to hypermedia resources, whether in a walled gardenor throughout the open Web, and this might include uses to referenceenhancement content resources relating to TV programming 860 and to ads840.

Linkage between elements of the head-end 810 and the portal 820 mayprovide a path for the transfer of state information in eitherdirection, thus enabling session coordination between the TV device setand the PC device set. This state transfer may enable the transfer ofsessions, and the association and selection of enhancement resources inaccord with the current state of the TV. Also depicted with the dottedlines, in conjunction with PC 220, are optional thick client softwareenhancements, including control functions, possible functions relatingto TV programming and ads, an extended EPG, and/or possible otherfunctions such as described further below.

It will be understood that this and other schematics herein mayrepresent network paths in a linear series, for simplicity ofunderstanding typical flows, but that any or all of those paths mightuse common networks, depending on the technologies and topologiesavailable. For example, both the linkage of the PC 220 to the portal820, and of the portal 820 to the content 840 and 860, might be via theInternet. It will also be understood that differing embodiments mightdistribute functions differently, with such variants being especiallyrelevant within groupings of related functions, such as, for example,those suggested by the dotted ovals, so that the particular structure ofelements depicted in this example might take different forms. Thus, forexample, a rich variety of distribution alternatives might be employedregarding the allocation of functions, systems, servers, data, and thelike between the head-end and the portal.

Similarly, as discussed with regard to thick and thin clients and ASPservices, allocations between the STB 210 and the head-end 810 couldvary, as could those between the PC 220 and the portal 820. It will alsobe understood that while the portal is described in these examples asbeing operated by or in association with the cable operator, such aportal might be entirely independent, perhaps with a path for suitableinterchange of state information being provided in some way. Such a pathfor interchange might, for instance, be from the head-end or directlyfrom the STB, and might be employed at the portal or the PC. It is notedthat other variations are possible.

Since basic Web HTTP services are oriented to pull requests, support ofpush transfers from the TV and of advanced tracking and synchronizationcould be accommodated with more advanced techniques using HTTP oralternative protocols, such as are commonly used in Internet chat andcollaboration applications, or like those used for ATVEF triggerreception. Such chat and collaboration protocols include, for exampleInternet Relay Chat (IRC), Short Message Service (SMS), Simple MailTransport Protocol (SMTP) Jabber, Wireless Village, and proprietaryinstant messaging networks such as Yahoo!, Microsoft Network (MSN), ICQ,and AOL Instant Messenger or NetMeeting and T.120.

Similar methods have been employed in simple, program-specifictelewebbing services, such as those operated by ABC and by GOLDPOCKET,and the kind of cross-channel coordinating portal services describedherein might apply those protocols or variations on them, and/or mightbe built on top of the server and content management infrastructuresused to deliver those services. Related issues of fine synchronizationof enhancement resources with a base program, including techniques forframe-accurate synchronization could be addressed using the methods ofthose services, and/or of similar services, including that addressed inArchitectural Design of a Multi-Agent System for Handling MetadataStreams (Cruickshank, Agents '01), incorporated herein by reference.

Such use of a portal to link a TV to a PC can also provide otherbenefits by making resources of the PC usable in conjunction withenhanced TV services, such as to draw on information from cookies andother PC-resident-data and applications (subject to suitable securitymeasures), as described further below. This can reduce the need forinformation to be obtained from a user at the TV, and exploit theability of the user to easily maintain personal profile and support dataat the head-end/portal from a PC. In cases of multiple STBs in ahousehold, such as in multiple rooms, or of advanced STBs that supportmultiple TV sets, including STBs with gateway functions, such relayassociations could be specific to any selected TV set, and similarly,multiple such relay processes could be concurrently supported with anyof multiple PCs, perhaps used for multiple TVs and/or for multipleviewers of a single TV.

Such relay via the head-end can involve transfers in either direction.In addition to state transfers from the STB to the PC, user commands atthe PC could drive actions at the STB, again with simple softwareenhancements that can be provided at conventional STBs and head-endservers. Aside from the advanced case of general ITV or hypermediasession transfer, simpler transfers could permit the PC (or any otherInternet-connected device) to serve essentially as a remote control tothe STB for specific functions, such as, for example, channel changes,camera angle or other viewing option changes, PPV or VOD requests, andprovision of EPG functions at the PC that control operation of the STB.This method of relay through the wide area network is also applicable tothe more general relay of TV-related signals (streams) from a STB toother intelligent devices that is described below (for transmission viaIP over local facilities).

Another embodiment of a relay facility is suited to a likelyconfiguration for near-term connectivity that may precede theavailability of full-function home networks. It may be expected thatSTBs may, in many cases, integrate with cable modems (using DOCSIS orsimilar protocols). Such combinations can also be expected to offerwireless IP LAN connections, using technologies such as 802.11 (a, b, g,or other variations) or others such as Bluetooth (or similar PANs). Suchfacilities may lack the rich HAN and gateway functions promised by UPnPand HAVi, but could enable direct local communication of STBs to PCs andother similar devices using facilities that can be expected to be inplace to meet the conventional individual Internet access needs of suchsystems. Because the cable modem may in some cases be integrated withthe STB, it can be expected that they may be designed such that IPconnectivity between the two will be available (or readily added withsoftware only). In that case, such a configuration could provide thenecessary path for local coordination, allowing transfers to be pushedor pulled from the TV to the PC using this IP path.

The above discussion gives many examples of how the coordinationservices described herein can be adapted to a range of hardware andnetwork variations that may be suited to current and future systems. Itwill be apparent that other similar adaptations can be made usingcombinations of these or similar methods and configurations to adapt tomeet other needs and work with other configuration alternatives.

According to embodiments of the invention, the signal relay functionaddressed in numerous variations above is also suggestive of a morebroadly useful method for extending a STB or similar TV receiver deviceto convert the TV signal to a digital stream, such as in MPEG format andcarried using IP, that can be passed on to another system through widelyavailable home network communications. This could be in the set-top boxor a separate liberator, or in a home gateway, and could be linked byany LAN or wireless technology, such as 802.11 (Wi-Fi) or Bluetooth. ForSTBs lacking wireless support, the 1394 connection could be used toattach an external wireless transceiver device, and this could be adesirable way to enhance installed base STB hardware. This content mayinclude the primary video signal, or any secondary video signal selectedduring an interactive session, whether an alternative live feed, or astored video or multimedia program. This relay could be usable insupport of coordinated viewing and interaction, and supplementary to thecoordination of remote control interactions outlined previously, usingcurrently available PC/PDA devices. It could also be usable in supportof uncoordinated use of a PC or tablet or any other suitable appliance(including additional TVs) to access ITV programming, without the needfor special hardware or direct connection to a set-top box or otherbroadcast TV source.

Such a single point of conversion could reduce expense in the home byeliminating the need for TV receiver hardware in alternative devicesets, such as a PC/PDA. It could also reduce wide area network bandwidthrequirements for access to broadcast programs by avoiding the need forvideo streaming over the Internet (or private IP unicast or multicastfacilities) when an existing airwave, cable or satellite broadcastchannel is already carrying the program. Such relay is essentially anenhanced home gateway function and could be part of the STB, or insertedbetween the set-top and the TV monitor, or elsewhere, and could betransparent to existing devices. It could obtain the TV signal, convertit to an appropriate streaming format such as IP, and output it over thehome network to any device that wants it. Thus it serves as acentral/shared receiver of TV, from a source that may be non-IP, thatcan convert that program to an IP format for use by other devices in thehome. This uses the TV transmission plant for wide-area communications,uses a single TV receiver facility in the home, and efficientlydistributes the program in IP format within the home for use by anyIP-capable device. For example, using such a relay to insert a broadcastvideo window into a conventional Web page could be more efficient thanusing IP streaming to obtain the same video over conventional Internetpaths (and could do so without the need for a tuner in the PC). As willbe apparent to one skilled in the art, various decoding anddecompression facilities can also be provided by this common receiverdevice, to transcode to a different compression scheme, or nocompression, for local retransmission in the home, and various DRM andconditional access features can be applied to limit uses in accord withaccess rights.

According to another embodiment of the invention, as depicted in FIG. 7c, the back-channel from the TV/STB to the TV service might be lackingor limited, as may be common in current DBS satellite systems, oldercable systems, or traditional broadcast systems. In such systems, forexample, the back-channel might be entirely absent, might, be providedas an intermittent dial-up modem connection over a phone line, or mightbe a relatively low speed channel over satellite or cable. In such casesprovision of a back-channel could be by a local relay to another system,such as an Internet connected PC.

Providing such a relay path by direct wiring or by including WLANsupport on a TV or STB, or as an add-on adapter, might provide suchsystems with the equivalent of full connectivity for the various levelsof coordination described herein through that alternate path. This couldinclude full interactivity in one-box and two-box modes, as well as anylevel of coordinated mixture. In such embodiments, some set of basicenhancement resources might be provided through the directuni-directional path to the TV, possibly for use on that device set,with additional resources obtained through the Internet path, possiblyfor use at the PC, but either device set might have access to anyresource through the local relay path.

Sensory Mode Transfers and Heterologous Modes

Most of this disclosure focuses on cases of transfers that change thelocus of work and the use of different device sets having homologousmodes, but the case of changes of heterologous sensory mode may also beimportant and the same methods can be adapted to such cases, as will beapparent to one skilled in the art, based on the teachings herein.

For example, such a transfer might occur between a speech-based browsingsegment using a phone, and a display and button-based browsing segmentusing a PDA or PC. A user might call by phone to check on his scheduledflight departure, find that he will not make it, and verbally requestthat the “reschedule my flight” link be traversed not to the phone, butto the PDA, to allow for easier scanning and booking of alternatives.Instead of re-identifying himself and the flight he wants to change, thebrowser could be opened to the reschedule page with that contextre-established. Conversely, the user may confirm a flight on the PC, andtraverse the confirmation link with the indication that the confirmationresponse is to be targeted to his phone, so he can run off. It is notedthat the methods described herein do not require special coding of fixedalternatives at fixed points in specific resources, such as by placingexplicit alternate buttons on the confirm-this-flight checkout page for:confirm to Web, confirm to e-mail, confirm to Web-phone, and the like.The methods described here instead make such options standard in formroutinely available at any traversal point in a session, with fullplug-and-play access to all available and suitable device groups.

It may be helpful to clarify some issues relating to emergingrequirements for synchronization across multiple heterologous modes,particularly cases that explicitly combine speech with other modes, suchas for mobile use. This objective has some parallels with the objectivesthat have been addressed herein, but might differ in that primaryconcerns might relate to tightly coupled, fine-grained, synchronizedcoordination of multiple simultaneously active heterologous modalitiesof input and output, and to the special issues of synchronizing GUIinteractions with speech input and outputs, based on such complexmediation processes as speech recognition and text-to-speech. This mightinvolve complex synchronization of events and browser activity and useof advanced methods to provide conceptual translation and alignment ofrelated resources (such as speech segments and Web page text) betweenthese very different modes. To support this, it might be desirable todevelop new markup for hypermedia resources that makes explicitprovisions for simultaneous use of multiple heterologous modes, creatinga tightly coupled, unitary experience. Such a unitary experience mightbe expected to be oriented to support of a single user task, and at anygiven time might typically involve a single common resource, or a set ofequivalent, parallel resources, simultaneously presented in multipleheterologous modes, that is correspondingly responsive to inputs fromany of those modes. Similarly, ongoing navigation might be ganged sothat any mode of input applies to all active heterologous modes inparallel.

Thus in MVC terms (as described below), the tightly coupled heterologousmodes might present multiple views of a single common or replicated corestate model, linked by tightly coupled or fully integrated viewcontrollers. In contrast, homologous device sets differ to some moderatedegree in adaptation, relating to issues such as display resolution andfineness and richness of input controls, but are inherently similar inoperation and in their presentation of hypermedia resources. The markupmethods addressed herein are directed primarily to this case wherealternative homologous device sets might be used in sequentialsub-sessions or with limited simultaneity, creating a loosely coupledexperience supporting related but disjoint activities or tasks. Suchdisjoint, loosely coupled experiences are supportive of multitasking (ortask transitions) by the user, and at any given time might typicallyinvolve different (and non-equivalent) resources at the different devicesets, which might have varying levels of correlation and/or linkage ofactivity depending on the user's task, navigation path, and work style,and in which inputs relating to a given task and/or sub-session aretypically restricted to the device set presenting the resource thataddresses that particular task (apart from commands to transfer asession activity). Similarly, ongoing navigation might desirably have anaffinity to one given device set unless stated otherwise. Thus in MVCterms, the loosely coupled homologous modes might present largelyindependent views of disjoint, but typically more or less correlated,state models, using what might be logically separate view-controllers.Nevertheless, the UI methods taught herein and the UI methods that mightbe developed to support that kind of tightly coupled and heterologousmultimodal sessions could be adapted to align with one another, and, aswill be apparent to one skilled in the art, many of the methods taughtherein could also be applicable to those objectives as well.

According to embodiments of the invention, methods relating toheterologous multimodal browsing might further involve use of a browserarchitecture that could be based on a single, central MVC model ofinteractions that could be used by multiple browsing view-controllers,and which would thus be unlike common browsers. Such a method mightemploy techniques used in some fully synchronized collaboration systems.

Alternately, the methods that have been described herein might beemployed, for example, as add-ons to conventional browser architectures.Such embodiments might not require a single central model, although onecould be employed if desired. It is further noted that the event streamsimplification strategies described below could also be beneficial tosuch heterologous multimodal browsing.

The methods described here are for the most part not specificallyoriented to context-aware applications, except with regard to currentbrowsing activities as a context, but it will be apparent to one skilledin the art that they can be useful in such embodiments, and can beextended accordingly. The methods described herein have been describedprimarily with regard to aspects of context (state) that are internal toone or more systems available to a user, with some limited input andinference regarding the user's intended device set usage and taskcharacteristics, and how to exploit those systems and that stateinformation to provide coordinated application functions.

Naturally, to the extent that more extensive external contextinformation (such as from sensors and physical objects and/or from otherknowledge of the viewing environment and user behavior) andcorresponding application support functions are available, these methodswill generally be applicable to those state data and functions as well.For example, sensor data on the movement of a user might be used as acue to transfer a session from one device set to another, and morespecifically, this might include cases such as pausing a session if auser gets up from his seat, or transferring/activating an enhancementsession if a user reaches for a tablet. Some further aspects of theinvention that draw on awareness of external context, such as the use ofsuch data as a surrogate for direct access to state information, aredescribed below.

Model-View-Controller Embodiments and Event Stream SimplificationMethods

The methods just described apply equally to conventional browserdesigns, and to possible new designs based on a model-view-controller(MVC) architecture that separates functions in terms of an underlyingmodel, which encapsulates application state and includes the hypermediastorage layer, a view that presents that to the user and obtains inputs,and a controller that defines behavior and responds to user interactionswith the view to cause changes to the model. Such architectures maysimplify support for features such as device independence andcollaboration, as well as multimodal features, by isolating such issuesfrom the model.

The variations described earlier relating to multiple systems andindependence of systems and browser instances apply to MVC architecturesas well. MVC designs may provide for coordination of complex anddistributed multi-device-set and multisystem browsing based oncoordination or synchronization of separate model instances, in whicheach instance contains state information for the device sets andprocesses it supports, or alternatively by using a centralized modelthat contains all state information, as the driver for all views andcontrollers. In the case of the centralized model, as for the singlebrowser instance, coordination is relatively simple. This can also bethought of in terms of a single centrally controlled applicationprogram.

For the case of distributed models, just as for multiple browsers andindependent systems, the coordination requires more attention. Reviewingthe methods described herein in terms of MVC concepts is useful, both toclarify how the methods apply to an MVC architecture and to furtherclarify the conventional case. Two alternatives are that theexporter/importer/tracker be built as 1) an adjunct to the model thatperforms exports and imports in support of transfers to other models(essentially the case already described), or 2) alternatively as amediator that intercepts (or mediates) controller actions as statechange events, and broadcasts them to other coordinated models. Thefirst can be done essentially without any preparation prior to thetransfer request, as an ad hoc collection and export of current statedata from the browser (the model). The second involves ongoingcollection of the event stream that drives state changes as they occur(which can be more or less independent of the internal structure of thebrowser/model), but which may be limited in its ability to transfer allstate information needed to perform sufficient input re-feed tocorrectly initiate a synchronized replica, to the extent that thecollection process is not started prior to relevant state-change events(at least those that are not fully reflected in the hypermedia storagelayer). Thus the second may be architecturally cleaner, but may requireenabling tracking well before any transfer, which can be problematic interms of performance and usability. Both of those alternatives can beapplied to either MVC or conventional architectures. Both involve anexport/import activity, the first being essentially a consolidated batchexport/import of all relevant state at once, the second being anevent-by-event approach. The methods described above allow the burden offull logging of all events to be reduced by limiting state export/importto the aspects and times needed for transfer of work locus whenrequested. Thus all models need not be synchronized at all times (whichis unlike the case for collaboration or for fully simultaneous use ofmultiple modes). Further detail on these state tracking simplificationand reduction methods is provided below.

Features and Functions

As noted, these methods may be applied with a variety of triggeringconditions, hypermedia systems, user system architectures, and formfactors. Details of user interface, link arc coding, presentation andimplementation may vary accordingly. Some of the features and functionsinclude:

-   -   Communications support and device set management—types,        discovery, grouping, and standards    -   Coordination control center    -   Alternative transfer activation/deactivation control methods and        standing sessions    -   Asynchronous transfers, retention of transient links, and        simplified transfers    -   User controlled targeting during browsing    -   Link attribute controlled targeting for authoring/production    -   Priorities and preferences for managing device set use    -   Source and destination session behaviors and synchronized        tracking options    -   Congruent behavior of independent, dependent, and centralized        systems    -   Transactions, editing, cookies, and peer/server state    -   State tracking simplifications    -   Security, privacy, and digital rights management    -   Hypermedia edit applications    -   Venue/kiosk-based coordination    -   Flexible and deep integration with other applications    -   Sensory mode transfers    -   Virtual and augmented reality    -   Revenue models    -   Comprehensive framework for MMUI browsing    -   Deployment staging considerations and alternative approaches    -   Additional aspects relating to advertising and commerce    -   Further aspects of multi-channel MMUI services    -   Broader aspects of multi-channel hypermedia    -   Open EC linking on the Internet

The following discussion explores some representative embodiments ofthese methods under various usage scenarios.

Communications Support and Device Set Management—Types, Discovery,Grouping, and Standards

These functions and scenarios may naturally depend greatly on the natureof the systems and device sets available to the user. For convenience,classes of devices with similar form factors and technologies may begrouped as device set “families.” Some representative cases include astandard across-the-room TV with a digital STB with a remote, which maybe used in conjunction with a desktop PC located within easy reach.Supplementary device sets include a notebook PC or a tablet PC with awireless LAN connection that can be used from a sofa, and kept handy onan end table. Current notebook or tablet form factors are fairlysuitable for such use, and improved designs can be made more convenient,and styled for various home décor tastes. Such a high-resolution deviceset enables power browsing for intensive tasks. Another device set is aPDA-style form factor that is more compact, easier to handle in a casualsetting, and less expensive, but also less suited to power browsing andintensive work. Such devices might be have a charging pad base unitdesigned for convenient nearby storage.

According to embodiments of the invention, a user may want to have anarray of such options available. A major advantage of the methodsdescribed here is that they can be embodied in simple software that canbe added to any independent browsing-capable system, including legacydevices, to enable coordinated use on demand. The use of modular designand standardized base level communication provides the ability to makeit easy to support coordination on an open basis for anybrowsing-capable system, by simply adding the necessaryexporter/importer and device set management software. This eliminatesthe need for all cooperating devices to be provisioned in common. Anydevices at hand can be discovered and activated, including all systemsowned by a user, as well as systems that may be temporarily available,such as PDAs, notebooks, or tablets carried by visitors to a home orother venue. Such devices need not be dedicated to a given coordinatedbrowsing configuration and to browsing use, but can be brought into suchuse at any time on an ad hoc basis. Thus hardware expense becomes aminor factor, as users obtain various intelligent devices of variousform factors for other purposes. Most households can soon be expected tohave a rich complement of computers including desktop, tablet, PDA, andcell phone form factors, and any of these can readily be made capable ofcoordinated browsing use. As coordinated browsing becomes common,families may wish to acquire special living room or den-oriented tabletsthat might stay on the end table for more or less dedicated use, butthat is not necessary. A bedroom system may be used more casually, so asmaller PDA-like device may be preferred, as might be the case in a car,as well. New designs might provide for furniture with built in devices,such as seating with tablets that pull out of an arm, like an airlinebulkhead seat or lecture hall fold-away tray, or end tables withhide-away or swing-out devices. Other form factors may also appear, suchas special glasses with heads-up display.

In considering device set groups for an ITV system, for example, onegroup may be the ITV system alone, a second group might be the ITVsystem with a specific portable notebook PC, and one might be the ITVsystem with a specific PDA. “Generic” groups could be definable asconsisting of families of devices of a given form factor, with specificdevice sets assigned to corresponding generic groups. This can simplifycontrol and adaptation, such as with regard to preferences and defaultbehaviors, allowing a level of generic specification that is common toall device sets of a given class, with a further level that can bespecific to a device set. Thus any similar tablet, for example could behandled on a similar basis. Groups may be defined as overlapping andhaving common members, so for example an ITV-centric group could definethe ITV system as a primary device set and a PC laptop as a secondarydevice set, but the same devices could also be members of a PC-centricgroup that defines the PC as primary and the TV as secondary. The samePC might also be primary or secondary in one or more other groups thatmight have a PDA, and be used without an-across-room TV. Similarly,device sets may be grouped into subset or variant cases that facilitateadaptation to changes in the presence or absence of specific deviceswithin a device set. This can be useful for example when a tablet may beused with or without a keyboard. Such a structure provides a rich basisfor setting preferred and default behaviors that can be invoked on atask-appropriate basis at different times, and that can serve as acontext for targeting actions by the user and for coded targetingcontrols set by authors, producers, or distributors of hypermediaresources.

Coordination Control Center

Some embodiments might also provide for a control center application topackage and organize support of coordination functions. This mightinclude access to the various setup facilities, such as for managingdevice sets and groups, and for generic viewing control and supportfunctions. Such services may be implemented for each participatingsystem. Such services could be provided on a coordinated peer basis, sothat no system was dependent on any other single system for thesefunctions, but alternative embodiments could be based on a centralmaster system for a defined scope of systems and services. Coordinationof these services could be through any suitable protocol, including theuse of the central master system and database, or any peer protocol, andcan be based on distributed storage local to each device, or some use ofshared storage at a local or remote server, including use of SANs orNAS.

According to embodiments of the invention, viewing control and supportfunctions might include services as an entertainment portal, EPG,DVR-style library or archive manager, and the like, whether providedlocally or remotely, and whether integrated into one package or service,or composed of various linked services, such as might be composed withWeb services. Implementation on a PC might be as a local application(preferably cooperative with the browser), or as a remote ASP service,possibly enhanced with a browser accessory, applet, and/or othercomponent (e.g., FLASH) that provides selected local functions. This canprovide a control panel offering functions such as to facilitate accessto portal features and to support a pull transfer from a TV or otheractive device. Such a facility could also provide browsing controls thatintegrate with the browser for MMUI use.

Alternative Transfer Activation/Deactivation Control Methods andStanding Sessions

Also desirable may be the ability to control targeting by simplyactivating or deactivating a device. If so indicated in the device setpreferences, one way to transfer a session in some cases, such as from aTV to a designated enhancement device set, such as the tablet at thesofa, could be to simply power on the device. The device could join thenetwork, check its coordination attributes (which may be self-containedor obtained from a network source), determine that it is to seektransfer of enhancements to the current TV program (or initiate a newenhancement session associated with the simple video session) onstartup, and initiate a transfer pull request accordingly. Thus a usercould view the current base enhancements (such as a menu of currentselections) for the current TV program simply by pulling out the tablet.In some embodiments, such an activation might transfer an enhancementsession already in progress on the TV, transferring its more rich state,and with preset options for the disposition of the transferred sessionon the TV. Similar simple controls can also be offered for use of a PDAin coordination with a PC, or for other combinations.

According to embodiments of the invention, corresponding options couldalso be set on deactivation of a device, such as to automaticallytransfer a session before termination. For example, it might bedesirable to return an active enhancement session to the TV ondeactivating a tablet device. Further options might push state toanother device set, or to some intermediate caching storage or sessionproxy system or repository, in a ready but inactive mode, allowing theother device to activate the session at some future time, even if theoriginating system is unavailable, in what can be considered a pull fromcache. By using a session cache proxy in this manner, a session caneffectively be swapped out and held in limbo, with no active devicesets, until a user requests that it be pulled and activated at anycapable and authorized device set. Such a feature can also be useful asa standard browser feature for saving and restarting sessions even for asingle device set, whether using an external cache, or one internal tothat system, to provide functions far richer than current bookmarkcapabilities.

A related feature might also be desirable is a similar push transfer(via caching proxy) capability to trigger activation of a target systemfrom the originating system, if the target system is not currentlyactive. This might be desirable to simplify transfer to a device not yetready, especially in cases such as for a time-specific link that mightnot be directly actionable by the time the new device was ready. Such apush could be completed when the intended target system was activatedand became accessible.

An additional feature is that of a standing coordinated session, such asfor a tablet that is routinely available for use with a TV. Settingscould provide that the default for this device is for it to maintain asimple enhancement session with whatever TV program is active, andautomatically present the main menu or home page associated with thatprogramming (possibly changing with time-position) to serve as analways-ready interaction device. For such a case coordination could bemaintained to allow this standing session to maintain awareness ofselected state changes on the TV, notably when a channel change occurs.To support that, it may be desirable to provide a limited event trackingmode (based on a bifurcation of base video versus enhancement activity),in which only channel/program change events (and optionally additionalelements such as, for example, pause and other VCR-like trick playactions, and/or ATVEF triggers) are transferred. Similar standingsessions could be provided, separately, or in a presentation additionalto the program related session just noted, to present genericinformation from a portal service. Such a second-screen service may bemore attractive to viewers than the method proposed by some ITV servicesof “force-tuning” the TV to a portal screen at power-on.

Note also that the related concept of standing enhancements that arealways available from a default source, which source may be defined by awell-known convention (whether or not a standing session is activated),represents an advance from current models in which enhancements are notassumed to be available unless a specific indication is given. As ITVdevelops, an expectation of enhancement may be the rule, not theexception, even if the default enhancement is quite limited. This goesbeyond the idea of always-on enhancements, and the use of virtualchannels to create generic portal or walled garden services, to includedynamic, program-specific resources. It may give the effect of a specialvirtual channel or portal that may be dynamically associated with eachof any or all programs.

Asynchronous Transfers, Retention of Transient Links, and SimplifiedTransfers

Building on the above methods, the ability to defer a transfer to afuture time will now be discussed. Such functionality could allow a userimmersed in a current program to initiate transfer actions that could beheld in a pending state, so the user could continue viewing the currentprogram without further interruption, and attend to the transferredactivity at some more convenient time in the future. Such features maybe particularly attractive to program providers who wish to avoid lossof their audience to tangential activity. It will be apparent that thiscan be provided using the same methods and with a variety of userinterface options. Deferral of any number of transfers can beaccommodated by saving the transfer state records. Enabling of suchdeferral could be a standard feature, wherein transfers are routinelyheld until actuated at the receiving end, or could be indicated bycommand at the time of transfer. Activation of a continuation sessioncould be automatic, as described above for power-on, by a simpleexplicit action to enable the next session transfer, or by selectionamong a list of pending transfers that may be identified by source,time, link descriptor, or any of various other identification cues thatcould be stored with the state record. It should also be recognized thatsuch deferral of a session might be a desirable new feature even withina single device set, where the transfer is just over time, not acrossdevice sets, and that this is readily provided using the same methods.

Thus rich controls and information displays might be provided to allowusers to view saved transfers, and to allow authors to suggest how theyshould be handled. Displays of pending traversals might be organized bysome combination of program, time, advertiser, category, and/or othergrouping criteria. Such might have transitory, time-specific characterand could maintain the relationship of the link to its startingresource. This concept of flexible targeting in time might be understoodas another dimension similar to that of flexible targeting in the spaceof device sets. Thus, the traversal of a link might be controllable notonly as to which device set is targeted, but when it is to be targeted.

The methods described for user and author/producer or other control oftargeting to device sets should be understood as being also applicableto control of targeting in time. Thus, for example, users and authorsmight be provided controls and coding methods for specifying whetherlink traversals are to be synchronous or deferred. Further, wheremethods of controlling targeting to device sets are described herein, itshould be understood that similar methods may be used to controltargeting in time. Such targeting in time could provide for useractivation of deferred transfers, and could also provide for scheduledautomatic activation, such as for activation at the end of a program orsegment, or to coordinate with an activation feature that schedules TVprogram viewing, such as might be provided with an EPG. As indicatedabove, a list of selected links organized in terms of factors such asthe starting resource of the links could have broad utility fororganizing complex browsing tasks that extend over time.

A related useful feature is the ability to save and permit delayedactivation of time-position-specific links, such as for example ATVEFtriggers. In current ITV systems, such links become unusable and aretypically discarded once their time-scope has ended. Such links couldinstead by saved in a special history linkbase. A variety of userinterface methods can be applied to using such saved links. One issimply to record the entire program in association with the links, toallow replay and delayed activation in the intended context at theappropriate relative time positions. Another is to provide a reducedvariation of the program on recording, such a keeping only snippets ofcontext video, or using reduced resolution video or still referenceframes to provide a context the user can relate to apart from the fullbase program. Another is to just list the links with the contextparameters, and optionally with a text descriptor which may be providedwith such a link (in a manner similar to the use of an “alt=” text labelthat is coded in an HTML image-related IMG SRC link for use as analternative to the image itself in case the image is not presented). Tothe extent that such links have a time-scope that is coded with respectto real time, they could be adapted to define their scope in timerelative to a program start time or current time code or frame number,either directly or through a separate time base offset factor. Numerousvariations on these options will become apparent to one skilled in theart. Such facilities can provide an effect similar to asynchronous orpost-broadcast enhancements, but with added flexibility to both authorand user in determining when or if such links should be available.

While the orientation of much of this discussion has been to transfer offull sessions with relatively rich state, it should be noted that itmight also be desirable to provide simpler transfer functions based onsimplified variations on these methods. This might be of particularvalue, for example, for activation of simple transaction activities,where the communication process involved in the session transfer is usedto provide a more limited communication to an alternative device set, orjust to a remote server. This can be thought of as similar to the caseof a transfer at the start of an ITV enhancement interaction, wherestate is minimal, and little more than the link arc-related data need betransferred. For example, a TV program or advertisement may contain alink to enhancement information or to initiate a transaction, and thesession transfer process may be simplified to simply pass on the linkarc data. The receiving device set might simply provide a list ofreceived resource links, much like a special bookmark or hot list. Asnoted just above, this feature might also be used at the same deviceset, simply as an action deferral method. In some cases, the transferaction might relate to no more than a simple user request for action byan advertiser or vendor, in which case the methods described here can beadapted to send the transfer state record to a remote server, and thestate record is used as a form of transaction message, with no furtheraction by the user required, or with simple confirmation actions only.In such a case, the transfer record might include rich user information,such as billing address, shipping address, and other personal profiledata. Such a simplified transfer record can be transmitted using anyappropriate protocol, including HTTP, SMTP, SMS, other messageprotocols, or the like. One very simple variation on this is to triggeran e-mail to the user, and such an e-mail could contain a link relatingto further information or actions to be taken.

Another very simple variation could generate a Web page containingrelevant information, links, and possibly forms for additional input.These relay processes could include application processing that addstransaction-specific elements, either at the STB or at a head-endserver, but can also be limited to a standard process that simplypackages link arc data and sends it to the PC or any designatedalternate device set (with only a basic relay involvement at the STBand/or head-end). This pure relay process could avoid the need for anyapplication or link-specific support at the STB or head-end, and couldallow an interaction at a TV to produce an effect similar to that ofhaving clicked a link at the PC (that produces a corresponding Web pageor e-mail message). Such methods can also benefit from the useridentification and profile data that might be available from thealternate device set, such as in a cookie, database, or application—datathat may not be readily available at either a STB or the head-end (atleast not without burdensome user entry). Thus for example, a user couldorder an information package or product, and have fulfillment andpayment details provided by the portal and/or the user's PC, with anymaintenance of user data at the portal managed from the user PC.Depending on the communication configuration alternatives, as discussedabove, such communications can use any suitable combination of local andremote paths. Again, such simplified coordination might either besynchronized with the primary browsing session, or asynchronous. Itshould be noted that this kind of simplified transfer can be useful withcurrent low-end STBs, in communication with a head-end server, asdescribed earlier, and that, depending on the particular type of requestto be accommodated, such transfers can be routed to an alternate userdevice set for further action by the user, or simply acted on at ahead-end server. In this way the simplified methods can effectively beused to provide a limited-function ITV service, and one that can beconfigured to operate on its own, essentially as a message service,independent of any more advanced browsing functions.

It should be noted that in the case of commercial programming oradvertisements, an additional level of variation in program identitycould be involved, in that the relation between advertisements andsurrounding programs could be complex. Not only might a given commercialbe used with many different surrounding programs (and at many times),but personalization and targeting might cause alternative commercials tobe seen by different viewers of the same program. A variety of methodscan be used to ensure that interactions associated with such commercialsare handled appropriately, for example by including identifiers for boththe specific commercial and the surrounding program, as well as otheridentification of the commercial avail slot, as part of the stateinformation transferred, and by structuring further interactions to usethat information to control the response, and possibly to forward thatinformation, optionally with other profile information, demographicinformation and the like, for use with any remote transaction or othersupport or monitoring activities.

Again, depending on the particular embodiment, all such stateinformation might be transferred directly from the TV/STB, usingwhatever path is available, or some state information, as well as othersupplementary information, could be included in the transfer record aspart of a relay mediated by head-end servers. Thus, for example, even inthe case of targeted ads, rich interactions could be supported by usingsoftware at a head-end to coordinate with a PC, with little or nomodification to installed STBs.

User Controlled Targeting During Browsing

User controlled targeting at the time of any link traversal may bedesirable, as it allows the user fully dynamic control in adapting thepresentation experience to the task at hand, as it changes through acomplex session of interaction. The essence of non-linear hypermedia isthat they branch in accord with the non-linear nature of human thinkingand task flow. Needs and preferences may change from moment to moment,depending on the path taken and on external factors.

Thus, in TV-centric use, a user starting from a TV program may besignaled that relevant enhancements are available for use if so desired,or the user may spontaneously seek materials related to a program. AsITV becomes widespread, signals may not be needed to indicate generalavailability of enhancements, but may be desirable to flag items ofspecial interest. Such signals may be a visual bug, as used in WINK,other visual indicators on the screen or on a device within view (suchas a set-top box), sounds, or any other signal.

In any case, the user may take various paths from a TV program. He mayhave a quick casual interest and be content to interact with the TVsystem in classic one-box ITV mode, without bothering to use any otherdevice sets. However, he may have a more intensive need, prefer richerfunction, or want to use a separate device set to avoid disturbingothers who are also watching the TV. In that case enhancement contentshould be directed to an alternate device set. A likely hybrid case maybe to trigger some initial interactions on the TV, such as to see a menuof current options, possibly check some EPG information or similar basicand readily requested information, and then perhaps finish or insteaddecide to go deeper on the PC device set. Thus desired features are totarget from pure video to either the TV or the PC, and to target fromenhancements on the TV to the PC. In either case, it may sometimes bedesired to traverse to a linked resource on the changed device set, suchas to go deeper, or to transfer the current resource to the alternatepresentation device set, such as to interact more richly with it. Forexample, in a t-commerce application, the user may be about to ordermerchandise, and decide that the PC offers better function for fillingout an order form for a complex item (such as a new PC).

In such usage with enhancements to a TV-centric browsing experience, itmight normally be preferred that the base TV program be considered as alinked session distinct from the enhancement session, so that transferis understood to transfer the enhancement session, but not the base TVsession.

Activation of a transfer by the user may take a number of forms. One keyvariation is whether the transfer consists of the link actuation thatopens a new destination resource, or a cloning that duplicates thecurrent resource in the new setting, effectively cloning the existingsession at the target system. This corresponds to the difference betweenshift-clicking a link on a Web browser (such as MSIE) to open the linkending resource in the new window, and using the File/new/new windowmenu selection to instantiate a new window with the same cloned resourceas the current window. Similar control options might be provided toallow user control of whether a link traversal is acted on synchronouslyor deferred for asynchronous use, and to provide for scheduling suchdeferred activations.

An additional capability for TV-oriented viewing with a MMUIconfiguration, and readily provided using the methods described, is tooffer some simple commands for swapping and altering video views usingPIP (or embedded window) support. A simple command could be a PIP-flip,which for example, could start from device set A with resource 1 in fullscreen and resource 2 in a PIP, and causes a transfer or swap to deviceset B with resource 2 in full screen and resource 1 in a PIP. Variationscould cause the PIP on device set A to close, and/or omit the PIP ondevice set B. A simple control command language or macro facility couldallow addition of other similar functions by vendors or users.

A wide variety of specific UI controls can be used to provide these andother similar functions, both as standard features, and as user variableoptions, as discussed further below.

Link Attribute Controlled Targeting for Authoring/Production

While it may be generally desirable that the user have ultimate controlof his loci of work and use of device sets and the correspondingtargeting of resources, it is perhaps best left to the content creatorto determine or at least communicate to the browser a recommendedtargeting. This may be useful to control details of targeting ofindividual resources within the constraints of the device sets that havebeen put into active use by the user, and can also be useful foractivating available device sets as well. Embodiments may support bothuser and author-driven modes of control, as well as means for settingpreferences and priorities to govern how such controls interact.

Insight into how link attributes may be used and interact with usercontrols can be gained from current Web browsing usage, as well as fromother hypermedia systems, but broad use of ITV will likely lead tofurther issues and enriched features, which may be handled bystraightforward extensions of the capabilities outlined here that willbe apparent to one skilled in the art.

Reviewing existing practice, HTML has long had basic features fortargeting windows and frames within windows. HTML 4 provides for theattribute “target=frame-target” to specify the name of a frame where adocument (resource) is to be opened, which can be used in elements thatcreate links, image maps, and forms. Frames may represent an entirewindow or a designated region within a window. Names can be assigned toframes via the “name” attribute. A set of reserved target names providesfor generic controls, such as, for HTML 4.01:

-   -   _blank: The user agent should load the designated document in a        new, unnamed window.    -   _self: The user agent should load the document in the same frame        as the element that refers to this target.    -   _parent: The user agent should load the document into the        immediate FRAMESET parent of the current frame. This value is        equivalent to _self if the current frame has no parent.    -   _top: The user agent should load the document into the full,        original window (thus canceling all other frames). This value is        equivalent to _self if the current frame has no parent.

XLink provides for similar targeting behaviors, but with somewhatdifferent coding conventions and terminology. Here, the “show” attributehas functions corresponding to the HTML target attribute, specifying thedesired presentation of the ending resource on traversal from thestarting resource. Values currently provided for include:

-   -   new: An application traversing to the ending resource should        load it in a new window, frame, pane, or other relevant        presentation context. This is similar to HTML _blank    -   replace: An application traversing to the ending resource should        load the resource in the same window, frame, pane, or other        relevant presentation context in which the starting resource was        loaded. This is similar to HTML _self    -   embed: An application traversing to the ending resource should        load its presentation in place of the presentation of the        starting resource. This is similar to an HTML alt=attribute, as        used with an image IMG SRC link

SMIL provides for similar attributes, generally consistent with XLink,and the related XHTML standard. The SMIL 2.0 Linking Modules attributesinclude:

-   -   sourcePlaystate, to control temporal behavior for the        originating presentation when a link is traversed, with        attributes of play, pause, and stop    -   destinationPlaystate to control temporal behavior for the        originating presentation when a link is traversed, with        attributes of play and pause.    -   show, much as for XLink (and serving to set defaults or override        the sourcePlaystate attribute)

For SMIL target, “This attribute defines either the existing displayenvironment in which the link should be opened (e.g., a SMIL region, anHTML frame or another named window), or triggers the creation of a newdisplay environment with the given name. Its value is the identifier ofthe display environment. If no currently active display environment hasthis identifier, a new display environment is opened and assigned theidentifier of the target.” SMIL also provides for an area element thatcan associate a link with a spatial portion of an object, as in HTML,and with a temporal portion of an object (a time span).

None of these existing methods of using attributes have comprehended theproposed extension to multiple device sets, but based on the teachingsprovided herein, the details of providing such extensions will becomeapparent to one skilled in the art. Target attributes and specialreserved names such as these are readily reinterpreted and extended towork with windows on multiple named device sets. Frame target names canbe used to refer specifically to frames (or other similar designations)on multiple displays, and such names could be specified as a simplename, or in a display-frame hierarchy, such as for example in the formof “display-target.frame-target.” Alternatively, an additional attributecould be provided, such as “display=” to be used in combination with thetarget attribute. The special HTML or XLink reserved names might be usedlargely as is, with the addition of new ones such as, for example,following the HTML model:

-   -   _altblank: The user agent should load the designated resource in        a new, unnamed window (or more completely, a SMIL region, an        HTML frame or another named window) on the alternate display        (whichever that is, based on some set of rules for determining        which is the alternate display if more than two displays are        enabled).    -   _refblank: The user agent should load the designated resource in        a new, unnamed window (or more completely, a SMIL region, an        HTML frame or another named window) on the referenced,        (specifically) named display.

Alternatively, a separate new displaytarget attribute could be defined,with a separate display-target name value, and with separate but similarspecial reserved names.

Additional special reserved names might be provided to specifyalternative displays in a generic manner, such as, for example:

-   -   _TV: The user agent should load the designated resource on the        TV display    -   _PC: The user agent should load the designated resource on the        PC display    -   _tablet: The user agent should load the designated resource on        the tablet display    -   _PDA: The user agent should load the designated resource on the        PDA display    -   _RC: The user agent should load the designated resource on the        Remote Control display    -   _computer: The user agent should load the designated resource on        the whatever computer-like display (if any) is the alternate to        the TV

With such names, it may also be desirable that precedence rules providealternate mappings, so that, for example, all map to a single display ifthere is only one enabled, _PC and _tablet map first to one another, and_PDA and _RC map first to one another, and that all of the non-TV namesmap to _computer if their preferred mappings are not enabled. A list ofvalues might also be permitted, such as _PC, _PDA, _RC, to indicate apriority sequence depending on which of several devices may beavailable.

Embodiments may be standardized through widely supported bodies such asW3C or others, and the details of coding conventions of the kind justdescribed (or equivalents) could be determined in accord with theapplicable standardization process.

With regard to the issue of whether to automatically activate devicesets that may not already be active, it may be preferable to considerdevice sets as “enabled” if they have been defined as being availablefor use in the current device set group, even if they are not powered onor fully active at the time. In this case, additional attribute codingsmay be used to specify whether a device set that is enabled but notactive is to be activated as a result of targeting.

As noted above, resource coding might exploit advanced markup in XHTMLor similar languages to explicitly provide for variant presentationstyles to different device sets and form factors. Certain embodimentsmight also provide coding structures for different device sets and formfactors to be used concurrently, with coordinated inputs and outputs,and sensitivity to relevant events, such as based on the DOM eventmodel, with selection of presentation styles made accordingly, such asusing CSS, XSL, XSLT, or RML. Such methods may also provide the abilityto detect whether a given class of device set is available or active, orbecomes active, and alter the specified presentation of the resourceaccordingly.

Preferred embodiments could also support coding much like the “actuate”attribute that XLink provides for to communicate the desired timing oftraversal from the starting resource to the ending resource. Thisincludes attribute values of “on Load” to indicate that traversal shouldbe immediate on loading of the starting resource, as is the case for anHTML IMG SRC link, and “on Request” to indicate that traversal occursonly on an explicit post-load triggering event, such as clicking on alink, or a timer countdown, such as for a redirect.

A further feature is to support a link coding that has no endingresource (or equivalently, one in which the ending resource was the sameas the starting resource, or equivalently, the special reserved resourcename “self”). Such a link might be equivalent to opening a new windowwith the current resource (and associated context). This feature hadlittle motivation on a single display, but is useful in a MMUI toestablish a session at a second device set, and could be used inresource coding when such action was to be recommended. One example of ause where this could be desirable is when a video sequence that containsspatial hot spots was beginning, so that an enabled tablet could beplaced into session with the same video resource in order to facilitateprecise selection of desired objects within the image.

It should be noted that alternative methods of specifying MMUIaffinities may also be desirable in some applications. For example,instead of the method just described for embedding markup withinresources, an alternative is to define a structure of resourcecategories or types, with specified device set targeting affinities forany resource of a given category or type. This is similar to the simple,highly structured multimedia menu and navigation schemes that werewidely used for pre-Web interactive systems (and now used for some ITVsystems), and while this may be less general, flexible and powerful thana markup based scheme, it may be simpler to implement and apply. Forexample, such a scheme might define a navigation hierarchy having basevideo, interactive indicator bugs, first level menus, i-th level menus,brief text pages, long and multi-page text pages, embedded video, linksto embedded video, and links back to primary video, and special-purposeapplication screens, such as for chat or forms entry, withspecifications that might have the first levels default to the TVdisplay, and further levels default to the alternate display, possiblywith links to primary video defaulting back to the TV. A table of screenassociations can be used to relate types of resources to devices sets.In usage, this could be loosely analogous to the current system tablesthat define application associations to file types, allowing files to beopened by double-clicking them, and could add screen affinity as asimilar association. The coding of such types might be standardized inaccord with the MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) protocol,and might be defined as types, subtypes, or parameters, or it might bedefined in accord with MPEG-7 using its Description Definition Language(DDL). Also applicable may be certain aspects of the iTV ProductionStandards Initiative Specification Version 1.0 (ITVPS), incorporatedherein by reference, that was released on May 6, 2002.

The ITVPS provides an XML framework for specifying content, presentationand behavior that is intended to provide a common nomenclature forinteractivity that can be used in production and content management, andsupport adaptation to various delivery and presentation systems. Suchpresentation systems may include components acting as a content logicengine. The specification provides XML schema and DTDs to definestructured content types for types related to games, polls,leaderboards, and the like. These structures can specify content bothdirectly, and by references such as URLs.

Some examples of how the above methods could be applied to controltransfers in accord with a possible extension of such a specificationinclude:

-   -   Predefined or implied type-based relationships to device sets,        such as certain content types appearing on certain device set        types. For instance, all polls, all games, or all leaderboards,        or certain sub-types thereof, might have implied targeting such        as primary-device-set polls versus secondary-device-set polls,        and so forth.    -   Dynamic variations on such type-based relationships, such as        might be defined in tables or other data structures. For        example, Type A polls might be given affinity to a given device        set while Type B polls might be given a different affinity.    -   Explicit target coding within the ITVSP XML coding, such as with        coding similar to that described above for link attributes    -   More finely granular typing, such as high-level elements of a        given type appearing on a primary device set but lower-level        elements within that type appearing on a secondary device set.        Such may include the use of implied, externally specified,        and/or explicit coding at such finer granularity.    -   Selection at the level of links from the ITVPS to other        resources, such as with link attributes like those described        above.    -   Selection within the resources that are linked to from the        ITVPS-defined portions, and by further links such as by using        any of the methods previously described.

Any such transfers could be specified as author recommendations, andcould also be subject to user control as well.

In various embodiments, a simple content presentation category structureadapted to control MMUI browsing May employ a three-pane interface. Theinterface could provide a “Play” pane for media playback, a “More” panefor contextual information, and an “Explore” pane for flexible browsingof related resources that provides Web browsing functions. Such couldprovide a three-category structure similar to, but perhaps simpler andmore generic than that of the ITVPS.

One embodiment of a MMUI based on such a structure might have “Play”screens default to a TV device set, perhaps with an option tore-allocate that class of resource to the PC device set. The embodimentmight have the “More” screens go to whatever device set the userselects, perhaps with a default set to either TV or PC by the systemprovider or author. The embodiment might further have the Explorescreens default to the PC, but perhaps with user option to re-allocatethat class of resource to the TV. In such an embodiment, authors mightstill have the ability to specifically code target affinities into eachindividual resource or page, independently of the pane type and itsimplied default affinity. As described before, the user options toassign a targeting affinity might include both settings that havecontinuing effect, and one-time selections that specify the handling ofan individual resource or link traversal.

Similar methods could also be applied to other standards that mightemerge to support richly structured content. One current example isNewsML (News Markup Language), an XML-based standard that provides forcollections of news items and related metadata that can be constructedin multiple ways, with specific named relationship types between itemssuch as “see also”, “related news”, or “for more detail.” The variousmethods of targeting described above could apply to such structures ofcomponents having named relationship types, both at the component andrelationship type level. Such content structuring and typing, and therelated support for substitution of alternative elements as equivalentsor complements (such as summaries or abridgements) and for choosingbetween inclusion or reference, could also facilitate dynamic adaptationto different form factors and systems.

SportsML is another emerging standard of this kind that addresses suchcontent types as scores, schedules, standings, statistics, and news.Other similar standards for other kinds of TV, video, audio, text, andother hypermedia content, including TV serial episodes, movies, dramas,sitcoms, newsmagazines, music programs, and other specific or genericformats might be developed and include targeting provisions of the kinddescribed herein. Such formats could effectively complement thoseaddressed in the ITVPS standards to address all kinds of hypermediacontent with defined typing structures. Details of application to theseand other similar variations will be apparent to one skilled in the art.

As suggested in the section on asynchronous transfers, similar markupattribute coding methods may be used to indicate whether a link is to bepresented and traversed synchronously, or deferred for use at a latertime. Such a facility might be used to encourage synchronous viewing ofenhancements that are closely related to the primary program and briefin nature, but to discourage synchronous viewing of enhancements thatare more tangential and perhaps more likely to distract from the primaryprogram and/or commercials.

It should be noted that when a link is authored for deferred traversal,it might also be desirable to allow further control over whether thepresence of the link is presented synchronously, or whether itsexistence remains hidden and later appears in some list of links and/orother control that provides access to enhancement content after theprimary viewing. Thus alternative attribute codings might include:

-   -   show the link for normal use, with user option to defer    -   show the link with deferred traversal as default, with user        option to override to synchronous traversal    -   hide the link and place it into a deferred link list for later        use

Details of such coding schemes for temporal targeting might depend onthe particular markup language being used, but could be similar to themethods described herein for device set targeting with the particularsbeing apparent to one skilled in the art in view of the teachingsherein.

Priorities and Preferences for Managing Device Set Use

The methods described provide for a blend of user and author involvementin determining the targeting of resources for presentation, and asnoted, a system for setting preferences and priorities could bedesirable. This may take a wide range of forms, depending on therichness of the embodiment and the nature of the balance between authorand user that is sought. Details may also depend on the range of contenttypes, content sources, form factors, tasks, and users being addressed,and may evolve as users become adept at using increasingly advancedfeatures.

The structure for setting user preferences may be expressive as to whatkinds of tasks should be done on what device, with what rules fortransfers and choice of alternative UI configurations. This structuremay provide defaults, wizards to allow custom configurations to bechosen based on a few selections, advanced customization andpersonalization of fine details, the use of multiple settings to allowdifferent presets to be used in different contexts (e.g., presets forcontexts defined to relate to different types of tasks and/or fordifferent combinations of active device sets), support for differentrooms (e.g., with presets for devices associated with a room and/or forportable devices that may be used in multiple rooms), and support formultiple individual users (e.g., with there being personal settings foreach user). The systems could apply settings based on definedconditions, but let the user override them at any time.

A standard structure for setting user preferences could be defined andimplemented across a wide range of browsers for consistent use by anysystem participating in a MMUI browsing experience. Such a structurecould start with the defined methods for author targeting in the codingof resources, and for user control at actuation time, such as describedabove, and could add a preference structure that allows the user todefine preferences as to when and how to moderate or override the coded(author suggested) attributes with regard to specific attributes, devicesets, and other usage contexts. This structure could also provide for UIcontrols to be used at link activation time to control targeting, andspecify what level of user controls to enable with what default settingsand when they may or may not override the resource codings andpreferences.

A simple example of mixed user/author control in current browsers thatis suggestive of desired expansions is the use of new windows in currentversions of MSIE with current HTML. The default for a simple link(traversed with the standard left-click action) is to open in thecurrent window. A user may force a link to open in a new window byshift-clicking the link, or by right-clicking and selecting the “open innew window” option from the pop-up list. This new window feature ispopular for viewing resources from a list of links, such a searchresults page or menu, while leaving the list in place in the originalwindow. An author can code a link to automatically open in a new window(using target=_blank), and this is popular for cases of looselyassociated resources, such as references, or for links to another site,when the author wants the current resource to remain available.Currently the coordination of these methods is not well provided for,and it may be difficult for a user to override a coded attribute, or foran author to be adaptive to user controls, and this is compounded by thefact that the author coding is not transparent to the user, so thetargeting to a target=_blank may come as a surprise to the user. Somelimited override capability may be available in special controls (suchas dragging a target-_blank link to the browser address entry box toopen it in the current window). These simplistic controls, and the lackof transparency into coded attributes results in conflicts between siteauthors and users with different tastes, and no clearly desirablesolution.

Addition of features to set preferences and priorities by the user, andto make coded attribute behaviors visible (such as by using alternatecursor shapes, colors, or other effects) could be desirable to make suchbehavior more predictable and controllable. Thus a basic structure couldrelate the following for each link attribute behavior coding:

-   -   what intent was suggested by the coding    -   what visible UI cues prior to activation was suggested by the        coding    -   what actual behavior should be taken based on a user preference    -   what actuation-time overrides could be make, using what controls

Further capabilities can be built upon such a preference and prioritystructure to allow preferences and priorities to be defined as namedsets that apply under specified conditions and also to be manuallyactivated or deactivated as desired. These could be set in two majordimensions: 1) the dimension of device set groups, and what optionsapply with which groups, and 2) the dimension of task modes, wheredifferent behaviors are defined for different task modes. Task modesmight be defined to relate to general activity types, such as casual,intensive, multi-tasking, and the like, where the user sets the activitytype that is operative at any stage of a session, and changes that asdesired. Task modes might also be defined by convention and set globallyby authors/producers, using attribute codes, to set modes by contenttype, which might be similar to task type, or more specific, such asextended content, annotations, references, or special applications, orto set modes corresponding to navigation levels, such as menus, content,subordinate content, and special applications. Other sub-dimensions oftask mode might include private versus shared, utility versusentertainment, and the like. Settings might also be variable withrespect to different device sets or device set groups, both in terms ofform factor, and such factors as location, such as living room versusbedroom versus kitchen versus auto versus walking versus sitting outsidethe home. Given the number of dimensions and variables possible, thiscould be simplified by building in standard default schemes, with simplealternative schemes pre-set as default or selectable as a unit foraverage users, and with advanced structures accessible for change at afine level by advanced users (or their support providers). A furthervariation in controls can be provided to allow users to override markupsuggestions (or other produced-in schemes) on a one-time, session, orpermanent basis. Some embodiments might also add various learningtechniques to gather knowledge of user behavior and apply artificialintelligence and related inference techniques to infer the user'sdesires. Such behavior controls can be obtained and composed from acombination of sources, including the user, the author (including thefull range of sourcing and distribution players), and from hardware andsoftware vendors, third party services, and other users.

In the case of an alternative embodiment of targeting controls using anexplicit category structure for resource types and affinities that isbased on the types set at time of authoring, as described above, usercontrols operable at time of viewing might be similar to those describedearlier, and a similar preference override feature could be applied tochange such target affinities on a type-by-type basis.

Source and Destination Session Behaviors and Synchronized TrackingOptions

As noted previously, there are issues of what behavior is desired ateach device set after a transfer, and these behaviors can be defined bya similar combination of defaults and preferences, author coding, anduser selection. Basic alternatives may be specified for whether sessionsend or pause or continue, whether some or all windows change state(e.g., close or minimize, change size, change focus, change position(including tiling or level of overlap), and/or the like), thedisposition of related UI elements (such as parent frames; for example),and/or whether device sets are deactivated or powered off. In the casewhere a session is paused, the simple default behavior might be that theuser be able to interact with it at the source device set independentlyof the transferred session at the destination device set. Alternatively,the option might be provided to bring the paused session into synchronywith the transferred session, which could be essentially equivalent torequesting a pull transfer back.

As with other control options, these alternatives may be defaulted by asystem, set as user preferences, coded by author/producers using formatssimilar to the SMIL sourcePlaystate and destinationPlaystate attributes,and controlled by the user at the time of actuation. As described withregard to control of targeting above, these behaviors might be fullyautomatic and/or be controllable by a single user action or other simplecommand sequence.

The previous discussion emphasized the issues of behavior at thedestination device set, but a similar richness of options, codingschemes, and user commands could be provided to address the dispositionof the source device set as well. Such markup schemes could be expandedto not only specify author recommended behavior, but to also specifypriority in cases in which users and authors have conflictingpreferences. In various embodiments, the relative power of user andauthor could be set by default, authors could use markup to specifyrules for under what conditions they defer to users, and/or users couldhave preference controls that specify rules for under what conditionsthey defer to authors. As described below with regard to congruentbehavior, all of these markup controls, user controls, and preferencesystems might be largely independent of alternative systemconfigurations, but could alternatively be specified to take suchvariations into account, perhaps prescribing different behaviors indifferent cases.

It will be understood that a reduced set of behaviors might be appliedin the case of a fixed allocation of resource types to devices setsand/or in the simple case in which all TV program enhancements areviewed on a second device set. Such a simple case may be, for example,one in which a PC portal is driven by a cable head-end relay inconnection with basic STBs. In certain such cases there might be nopresentation of session activity relating to enhancement on the TVdevice set, with such activity always being directed to the PC deviceset. This might be viewed bearing similarity to a case of all linksoriginating from a TV program resource being directed to a new window,wherein the new window is always targeted to the alternate device setand never appears on the TV device set.

These behaviors could take a different shape if the optionaltracking/synchronization feature is provided and selected. In this case,the source session might normally remain active and be kept insynchronization with the destination session, which might beinstantiated with the same resources active, and with equivalent sessionstate. In the usual case, user action might be permitted at eitherdevice set, and could trigger an event transfer with the essential stateinformation to replicate the effect of that event at the other deviceset, just as if the user action had occurred there. Alternative forms oftracking may be provided, as options, to make one of the device setsoperate in read-only fashion, so that it may receive UI events from theother but not originate UI events. Certain embodiments might alsoprovide for temporary disconnection of a device set from activetracking, but with the capability to save events at either location forlater re-synchronization when the device set reconnects, similar to theanalogous capabilities in (and possibly building on the facilitiesprovided in) advanced collaboration systems such as GROOVE.

Tracking support can be implemented on a single user or multi-userbasis. Multi-user support is typical of conventional collaboration orgroupware systems, and requires additional attention to managing useridentity, security, privacy, privileges, and the like, with regard toboth an individual user and the membership of multiple users in anactive collaboration tracking session. It will be understood thatgroupware collaboration is directed to this issue of multiple users, andconventionally assumes that each user has his own SMUI system (typicallya PC, and typically at different locations), with the objective ofgiving the multiple users the illusion of shared access to a singlesystem that reflects the actions of any of them. Such systems mustmaintain full synchronous replication of all UI input and output eventsto each participating system, which is not what is generally desiredwhen a single user uses multiple device sets (and may wish to allocatetasks or sub-sessions to a single device set, as extensively describedabove). As will be apparent to one skilled in the art, the collaborationtracking/synchronization methods used in conventional SMUI groupwaresystems are readily adapted to extend the single user, MMUI trackingmethods that have been the primary subject herein to the proposedfurther inclusion of multi-user, MMUI collaboration tracking as acomplementary mode of use. In drawing on groupware art to extend it tothe objectives of a multi-user MMUI, it is useful to recognize that arange of methods have been used in groupware relating to differentcoordination levels of display (image) broadcast versus event broadcast,the use of centralized versus replicated state control, and whether theapplications are collaboration-aware, and these issues have parallelswith the MMUI architectural variations described herein. Recapping theteachings provided herein with regard to the variations just noted, theobjectives of browsing can be well met in most common cases with methodsthat are collaboration-aware and MMUI-aware, and with the granularityachievable with selective event replication. These may be applied ineither centralized or replicated state control contexts, depending onthe platforms to be supported. Nevertheless, MMUI techniques could alsobe accomplished by display replication, and software environments couldbe provided to permit applications to be MMUI unaware.

It should be noted that some support of management of user identity,security, privacy, privileges, and the like may be desirable evenwithout multi-user collaboration features. This would protect thesecurity of individual users, and allow for multiple independent usersof the systems supporting the MMUI to set individual preferences,maintain individual history lists and other individual contextinformation that could persist across sessions and be protected frominterference by other intervening users, such as other family members oroffice mates. It should also be noted that a further useful feature in amulti-user case might be to transfer a browsing session to another user,whether at an alternative device set, or using the same device set. Theformer could be useful to pass activity to another TV viewer who has hisown personal device set (whether collocated or not), and the lattercould be useful to change the context of a session to take on attributesand privileges associated with the second user, such as to conduct atransaction. The details of supporting such controls and transferfeatures will be apparent to one skilled in the art based on theteachings herein.

Congruent Behavior of Independent, Dependent, and Centralized Systems

Described in the foregoing discussion has been the case of a true MMUI,where the coordinated device sets that compose a MMUI are independentsystems, being driven by separate processors. From a user andapplication perspective this is just one end of the broader MMUI (orMDUI) spectrum from centralized systems to partially interdependentsystems to fully independent systems. From a technical implementationperspective, it is the one that is most challenging, given the need totransport and reestablish all relevant aspects of session state. Most ofthe teachings provided herein for that case are also applicable to themore centralized and interdependent cases, but embodiments for thosecases can be greatly simplified by exploiting common elements and commonaccess to state information.

Examples of alternate embodiments of a MMUI with variant, morecentralized architectures are possible configurations 1) of an advancedTV, with PC-like capability and able to directly drive a tablet,laptop-like or PDA-like I/O device set, or smart remote control, and 2)of a PC-DTV system that supports an across-the-room TV monitor andremote control in addition to the usual PC I/O device set. These arefundamentally very similar, but can be expected to differ in that theycome from very different hardware, software, infrastructure, andbusiness “cultures,” that shape them quite differently. Otherarchitectures that may be more or less centralized may relate to morePC-centric assemblages, such as Pebbles-style PC-PDA combinations,combinations of intelligent tablets used in conjunction with PCs,assemblages that loosely couple TV STBs with separate home entertainmentcontrollers, video game systems and many others.

Externally, it may be desirable that the MDUI behave consistently forbrowsing and transfer of work locus regardless of the systemarchitecture (true MMUI, centralized, or whatever), effectively maskingsuch internal implementation details from the user, except in so far asattention is needed to set up and manage configurations, device setgroups, and such. It may also be desirable that the user be generallyunaware of whether he is browsing across a system with one processor andsoftware image, or one with many.

Internally, with regard to software implementation, much simplificationis possible in the case of a centralized system in which all device setsare driven by a single control processor. In this case it is possiblefor all browsing to be done with a single browser software instance,with direct access to all browsing state and context information for allof the device sets in use, and with true common access to the hypermediastorage layer, as well as to all system storage, including persistentstorage and transient storage used for resource caches and system cachesand other transient state information. Thus much of theimport/export/tacking function is obviated. Instead of transferringsessions and state, the essential task reduces to pure coordination ofsessions and state across device sets, which depending on embodiment,may be generally similar in nature to that of coordinating browsing withmultiple windows on a single device set.

It should be noted that such centralized session processing and controllimits the overall function provided in a number of ways. Ability to addand remove a device set from coordinated use may be limited. The centralsystem must be capable of recognizing and driving all desired devicesets at a level that is sensitive to their form factor and renderingcapabilities. Thus, for example, whether based on a PC or STB, thecentralized browser must be equally at ease with the details of devicecontrol and of rendering presentation resources for a high-resolution PCscreen, a TV (SD or HD), a PDA, or a display-equipped remote control. Ingeneral, the openness of such architectures to systems and device setsof widely varying architecture and configuration, provisioned fromvarying sources, and assembled and applied in an ad hoc fashion is morelimited and difficult to adapt to unexpected requirements. With thedecentralized methods described herein, all that is needed for anarbitrary system to participate is an exporter/importer that is capableof transferring session state in the standard, high-level format andgranularity established for any member of a MMUI device set group.

Intermediate cases may be addressed by these methods as well, anddepending on their architecture, more or less of the transferimport/export process could be required to achieve coordination. Systemsmay be technically independent in that they are separable and useindependent processors, but for purposes of coordinating a MMUI, theymay run in a centralized application mode. Common collaboration systemslike MICROSOFT NetMeeting and others based on ITU T.120, run in thismode, as do some thin-client terminal systems like Windows TerminalSystem. In this case, the device set displays are not driven by localapplications, such as browsers, that render onto them locally, but bydisplay replication from a central system that runs one central copy ofthe application that does the rendering. Coordination across device setsis at the level of direct UI input/output actions, not at the level ofsessions. There is really just one application session. Thus many of theconstraints of a centralized system generally apply to this architectureas well.

A similar variation that exists at a software level is also to be noted.A single controller system processor, or multiple processors in atightly coupled, shared memory, multi-processor system or a cluster orother assemblage such as a grid system presenting a single system imagemay run multiple independent browser instances (running as separatesoftware processes) that share the operational logic of the processor(s)and other basic system resources, with each instance controllingseparate device sets, and each capable of coordinated use together, muchas for independent browsers. A very simple example is that of runningmultiple instances of a browser, such as running two instances of MSIEon a Windows PC. In such a case, some aspects of the context maypotentially be commonly accessible, such as page resource caches,history lists, cookies, and storage systems, but details of sessionstate (such as current page, navigation path, window configurations, andforms data entry state) may be local to each browser instance. Thus MDUIcoordination might not be supported across those browser instanceswithout the addition of the methods for state transfer described herein,simplified somewhat by the common hardware, software and contextelements in ways that will be apparent to one skilled in the art (suchelements may not need to be transferred, or may be transferred byreference only). Another example might be a case of running multipledifferent browsers on the same system, such as might be done for anadvanced TV with PC functions or a PC-DTV system that might run aconventional ITV browser for enhancements oriented to the TV, and MSIEor Netscape for Web browsing. Here again, coordination might not bepossible without adding support for the coordination methods describedherein, and here the simplifications relate primarily to thesimplifications of communication within the integrated hardwareenvironment.

To complete this discussion of independence, it should be noted thatthere is a more extreme case of independence, that in which commonaccess to the hypermedia resource storage layer is not available orreadily used. This may occur in cases where network access isconstrained, and devices may have only limited capability for signalingone another. A related variation is where resources are distributed onphysical media (that are mounted locally) and separate access is morereadily provided than shared access. In such cases, the transporter andstate records could be expanded to add context details on the resourcesin use sufficient to synchronize or transfer desired portions of theresource content along with the session that presents them. One examplemight be that of enhancements to a video (or music, or other) resourcethat is on CD-ROM or DVD, where one device set may have a copy of thestored resource, and the alternate device set may have a duplicate copy,or a server-based copy, or just the associated enhancement resources.

As a further clarification of the concepts addressed herein relating tosession transfers and synchronization as they relate to variousconfigurations and embodiments, it may be helpful to view sessiontransfer as composed of two related but distinct sets of methods. Oneset of methods concerns the low-level task of coordinating state,including the basics of state transfer, import and export, and thevarious levels and forms of synchronization. The other set of methodsconcerns the related higher-level task of managing the desired behaviorof sessions as viewed by the user at the source and destination devicesets. Considered behavior might include, for example, how sessions end,pause or continue at a source device set after a transfer and/or howappearances of transferred sessions are presented at the destinationdevice set.

It is noted that the perspective just described can help provide aunifying framework for consistent understanding of how these functionsapply in varying embodiments such as centralized or distributed systems,or in fully synchronized systems. It is further noted that theperspective can be thought of in terms of a matrix, having two rowscorresponding to the two tasks of 1) synchronization and 2) managingvisible behavior, and having many columns each corresponding to thedistribution embodiment cases.

In such a matrix, the basic state coordination methods (the first row)may address the issues of distributed and independent systems. In asimple case of a fully centralized system, state might be readilyaccessible to a single browser instance that handles all device sets.The basic aspects of exports, transfers, and imports could be reduced totrivial tasks, if not eliminated entirely. The case of multiple browserinstances can be viewed as a case of software function distributionwithin a centralized hardware configuration, and might be more complex,as described above.

In the case of independent systems, these methods might need to take onricher form, and from one point of view, the statetransfer/synchronization task may be to make the multiple systems act asif they were centrally controlled and had shared access to the state ofthe session (or sessions, as expanded below). From that view, fullysynchronized systems (which might include cases of systems synchronizedusing collaboration software) might be thought of as simulating acentralized system, and thus the synchronization process might be viewedas effecting a kind of virtual centralization. In an extreme case, fullsynchronization could be maintained at all times, and the virtualcentralization could be ongoing.

One way or another, lower level session state could be made availablefor control of all device sets. To summarize across the cases, thiscould be largely inherent in a centralized system, could be provided bythe export/transfer/import methods described for independent systems,and could be similarly provided in cases of full synchronization. Withthis perspective, synchronization could be viewed as an added feature tosession transfer, or, alternatively, one could view session transfer asan added feature to synchronization. From this perspective the cases ofa centralized system and of a routinely synchronized system couldprovide a similar base for coordination. Both could have ready access tothe relevant session state information, but both still could need toapply the kind of higher-level methods described herein to control theview of session behavior presented at the device sets.

Further considering the matrix view, the higher-level task of MMUIsession coordination (the second row) may be largely the same regardlessof the physical configuration and however state data is made available.This higher-level task could provide the desired controls over whethersessions end, pause, or continue at a first device set after a transfer,and other aspects of how their presentation to the user should bealtered.

Much of the discussion herein is oriented to the case of independentsystems, and often refers to the case of sessions being terminated at asource device set after transfer to a destination device set, and ofbeing established at the destination. From the perspective justdescribed, however, it will be apparent that in a centrally controlledsystem or in a fully synchronized system that gives the virtual effectof centralization, detailed implementation of the methods describedmight be such that the session might only appear to be terminated. Suchmight be the case, for instance, where just one underlying session ismaintained, one that is to be presented in different views to eachdevice set, but which is no longer to be presented to the user on thesource device set. Similarly, establishment of the newly transferredsession might just be a matter of making it visible. Except where statedotherwise or clear from context, such references to session terminationor establishment should be understood as including embodiments in whichit is just the appearance of the session that is terminated orestablished.

This higher-level coordination can be understood as coordinating theappearance of a session as seen from each device set. The term“co-session” may be used to refer to each visible presentation of acoordinated session as it may appear at each device set. In thedistributed cases described extensively herein, an embodiment maycompletely terminate a co-session that is to be ended at a source deviceset, but still might possibly save its state as a special history recordthat can be re-activated. In a centralized embodiment (real or virtual),the same effect might be achieved by simply removing the co-session fromview. This might appear as a complete removal, or be presented usingother techniques. Such techniques might include minimization of thecorresponding window so as to leave a vestigial representation such asan icon in a taskbar or an entry in a task list. This might also bethought of in terms of “opening” and “closing” of sessions, or moreprecisely, of session presentations.

Thus, consistent with other discussion herein, an aspect of the methodsfor this higher-level coordination relates to the controls that might beprovided to enable users and/or authors to determine the disposition oftransferred co-sessions such as whether they disappear, and whether theyare restored to view showing the state at which they were left orcontinue to be synchronized with the state of the co-session that wastransferred to another device set. As noted regarding congruentbehavior, it may be desirable that, for the most part, these behaviorsbe largely independent of physical distribution.

In following that principle, it is noted that one behavior that wasdiscussed in the context of a distributed embodiment was the case ofpausing a source co-session, and that if that feature is to be providedin a centralized case, special support might be required to save thestate as virtually “paused” for that one device set (perhaps beingessentially a matter of taking a checkpoint) while the co-session on theother device set continues and changes its state. In such a case (e.g.,for any of the distribution embodiments), the paused co-session might bere-activated, possibly with controls that determine whether it appearsas it was when paused or is first brought into synchrony with theco-session that had continued. In the case of activation with the stateas at the pause, the session could, in some embodiments, continueindependently from that point as a forked, and now independent,co-session. Alternatively, the transferred co-session could have beentreated as a forked session at that time, and controls could be providedfor later re-joining the sessions based on adjusting to the state ofeither selected one. The term co-session, as used herein, may refer tosessions having a full range of relationships, including forkedsub-sessions and enhancement sessions that might become divergent or beloosely coordinated, as well as to tightly coordinated or fullysynchronized sessions.

It will be further understood that these higher-level control functionsmay be temporally coupled with the lower level transfer functions inthat they coincide with the time of export and import, but logicallydecoupled and implemented separately. As noted above, in the centralizedcase, the low-level state export/import/transfer function might beimplicit or trivial. Also as noted above, an alternative embodiment forphysically independent systems might provide for each to be maintainedin full synchronization. In such case low-level state transfers couldoccur routinely to maintain synchrony, even when no higher-level sessiontransfer was invoked, and might have little or no direct coupling withsuch transfers.

Transactions, Cookies, Peer/Server State, and Editing

Further issues in coordinating MMUI sessions apply in cases where stateis complicated by transactions and related data entry, cookies, andstate for an associated server or peer system session. Many similarissues apply when editing of hypermedia resources is supported. Methodsfor addressing these issues are described in this section.

For both transactions and editing, additional details of state relatedto user input to transaction entry forms, such as for example HTML forms(or XForms), or to an edit-capable browser or equivalent program, mustbe maintained in the state record to enable a finely grained sessiontransfer capability. This relates to the relatively fine granularity ofdata entry input and control interactions, as opposed to the more coarsegranularity of link traversal in simple browsing. The simple solution isof course to not support this finer granularity, and to have transfersignore any such entries if not submitted to the server or committed ascompleted edits to a resource in the storage layer. Such a solution maybe quite satisfactory in many uses, and users could adapt to avoidintermediate transfer attempts, or live with the task of re-establishingthe entry details that were lost. This limited level of support isconsistent with how some (but not all) current Web forms processinghandles the back button, where the form is presented in its originalempty state, and any user entries are lost.

Naturally, more complete support may be desired by users, and this canbe enabled by including the edit state details in the state record whenexporting and importing a session. Specific methods for this may varywith the details of browser or editor implementation, as will beapparent to one skilled in the art, but the basic result is a structuredlist of all edit entries, including such metadata as needed to identifythe elements and positions to which such entries refer. In the case ofform fields, this could list entries by field name and value, or, as inthe case of XForms, provide an XML structure for the form entries andvalues. In the case of resource editing, such details might be a traceof changes similar to that maintained by a word processor for use inundo/redo commands, and for recovering changes after a crash (includingreplaying all intermediate events, using snapshots of state, and hybridsof the two). Emerging standards for access to resource structure andmanipulation events, such as DOM and the DOM event model may be used tocapture such finer-grained state elements. This would permit access tosuch events as entry to and completion of a form, and to the filling offields within a form. Other finer-grained state details may also becaptured by similar means, including well-known interaction points inbrowser interaction widgets, and can thus be used for more fine-grainedcoordination. Methods for forms input capture are similar to those usedin browser form-filler programs and autocomplete features. A Microsoftfacility, IPersistHistory, enables the saving of forms state data foruse at a later time on the same machine, and similar techniques can beadapted to extract this data for export. For example, this data can beobtained from (and inserted into) the Dynamic HTML Object Model used onIE 4.0 and later browsers, using the IHTMLFormElement Interface, andother browsers offer similar access to the document object model (DOM).

Also a factor in finer-grained local state is the use of embedded logicand of plug-ins or other support logic that extends standard browserfunctions. The simplest solution, again, is to set a granularity thatignores the internal state of such elements (such as by starting themover), and this may be quite satisfactory for many applications. A morecomplete solution is to address granularity at the level of user inputs,in which case methods similar to those described for forms and editingcan be used, including tracking and replaying all intermediate events,using snapshots of state, and hybrids of the two. Capture of fullsoftware process state is also possible, but much as for the browseritself, would involve a level of complexity that may not be warranted.

Regardless of the level of local granularity desired, transactions(including queries, e-commerce, and the like) and many other kinds ofremote sessions maintained between user system and a remote peer orserver system are usually stateful, and require support if that usersession is to be transferred to another device set. Such situations canbe understood as involving a user session that at some point enters intoa remote session with the peer or server, such as to place an order orto obtain services that involve a continuing session identity over aseries of interactions. A given user session may over time have multiple(sequential or overlapping) remote sessions associated with it. Thus totransfer a session, while it participates in a remote session in a waythat allows the remote session to be maintained, requires that therelevant state information for that remote session effectively betransferred, and that the transferred local session be able use thatinformation to re-establish and join with the corresponding remotesession. In the case of a centralized browsing system and single browserinstance, this is relatively simple, since most of the change isinvisible to the remote system, but for independent browsing systems itis more challenging, since the network address and other system-specificinformation (security certificates, system identifiers, and cookies,associations with shopping cart information and other transient orintermediate transaction state, and the like) for the new system may bechanged. Similar issues and methods apply to client-side wallets,passports, or other identification, profiling, and preference data.

An intermediate, somewhat simplified, case occurs when the transferoccurs at the point of actuation of a traversal that begins a remotesession. In this case, the transfer process need only transport andimport all persistent cookies (or other persistent state information)that may be associated with the domain of the specified server for thetarget system to be able to initiate a session with that cookieinformation.

The more difficult case is that of a transfer after the session has beeninitiated from the first user system. One method of handling this caseis to hide the change in address from the remote system, and this can bedone by relaying through a proxy server that is set up to mask the trueaddress of the user system. Such a proxy would preferably be secure andtrusted to protect against unauthorized or spoofed session transfers.This proxy could be located at the first user system, and that wouldoffer the benefit of enabling the proxying to be started mid-session onan ad hoc, as needed basis, using the already-established networkaddress. More generally, such a proxy-like server can be embodied in anylocal controlling devices, such as a gateway, set-top box, or any PC, toallow multiple coordinated devices in the home to appear as a singledevice and single client IP address to the remote server, againretaining transparency at the server. In this case the control devicewould replicate the cookie or other server-visible state informationjust like the other (local) state data, or could maintain the cookie (orthe like) at the proxy (in a manner similar to that used in proxyservers that support wireless devices).

Similar proxy functions can also be provided by a remote server, whetheran independent proxy server, or integrated with a remote service. Onealternative approach is to add support to the remote peer or serversystem to enable it to be aware of the session movement and to adapt tothe changed network address and system identity. This might take theform of protocol-level support at both the client and remotely to dealwith replication or migration of a client that is treated as a singleuser. This could also be done in a manner generally similar to supportfor roving IP addresses that is intended to support mobile devices inMobile IP, based on remote proxy-like approaches in the network (in thatcase at the wireless access node, and thus transparent to the server),and in more advanced context-aware portals. Such support could also drawon the somewhat related methods used in Windows “roaming” support toallow a user's basic (static) Windows system preferences to be passed toa server and used to personalize a second PC to the same settings. Inthis case, the state replication logic described earlier might maintainthe distinct identities of any network-visible and network-addressableclient components. This can be further supported by the browser transferprocess by sending a transfer notice to the remote system stating thedetails of the new systems address and identity, and again preferablyproviding security authentication information to protect againstunauthorized or spoofed transfers.

Server sessions may be particularly critical to support of ITV servicesthat rely on head-end server support to provide functions supplementaryto those of limited-function STBs, such as analog STBs or basic digitalSTB models (such as, for example, MOTOROLA DCT2000 or SCIENTIFIC ATLANTAExplorer 2000). This may include cases where many or most interactivefunctions are controlled by the head-end server, with the STB actingessentially as a thin client I/O controller that is architecturallysimilar to WTS, CITRIX, or X Windows (even including remote PC-likefunctions such as using the PEACH NETWORKS technology acquired byMICROSOFT). In such a case, coordination could be managed at the server,using the methods described in regard to the STB, but with alteration ofthe communication paths to include the wide-area communicationsrequired. Such communication could be routed from the server to the STBon the cable or satellite facilities, and then locally from the STB tothe PC or other coordinated device set, but might more readily be routedfrom the head-end on an alternate path to the PC, such as via theInternet. This method of using the TV/STB as a thin client-based deviceset, with support at the server for coordination with a PC-type deviceset could be very attractive as a way to provide rich coordination usingcurrent installed base hardware, with little or no change to STBsoftware, with most or all of the added software at the head-end(linking over the Internet to enhanced browsing software at the PC).This is a variation on the embodiment described earlier in regard tostate transfer via head-end and Internet. Further variations could addflexibility to offload intelligent function from the head-end tocoordinated. PCs, including such functions as basic interactionnavigation support tasks, more advanced browser functions, such asinterpretation of image region hot spot metadata as link arcs (similarto that done at the head-end by VEON servers), and specialized andsupplementary services.

A further extension of this approach could place all coordination andstate management intelligence at a remote server, acting as a centralcontroller, so that all local device sets operate as (more or less)stateless thin client/terminal systems. Such thin client/terminalfunction could be at the level of display image replication, or at alevel of simple browser rendering and basic navigation functions. Moregenerally, this method permits a spectrum of embodiments that vary interms of how coordination function is distributed among TV-type systemelements and PC/PDA-type system elements at the user location, andhead-end or other remote server-based elements, including mixed casessupporting multiple distribution architectures. Such methods can be usedto build a range of extensions from current 2-box ETV offerings thatoffer greater integration and coordination of the two boxes, potentiallyincluding the high levels of flexibility in targeting enhancements tothe TV or the PC/PDA described above, and that can work withinstalled-base STBs as well as more capable units. It will also beapparent that such methods of placing coordination functions at theserver may also be applied for coordinating state for server-basedfunctions (including transaction functions) in general, as an alternateto the more peer-to-peer and distributed methods described above, andthat such methods may be particularly attractive in contexts where thenecessary reliance on remote services is not viewed as a disadvantage.Note that in such cases, the Internet path could happen to be physicallyon the same cable as the TV signal, such as by using a DOCSIS Internetconnection, but be logically distinct.

State Tracking Simplifications

The methods described herein for state transfer at varying levels ofgranularity offer significant advantages in simplifying the coordinationtask. This can be understood as exploiting strategies for limiting whenevents are tracked and how they are collected and communicated. Existingand proposed systems for collaboration and systems for simultaneousmultimodal interaction generally require ongoing collection andbroadcast of state-change events in realtime while such activity isactive, and collection and storage of such events for latersynchronization if delayed activation of such features is to bepermitted. In the case addressed herein of session transfers, thissupport can be selective as to what is collected and what is exported.The methods described herein seek to reduce the portion of stateexported to the minimum needed for a given function.

This was presented in terms of ad hoc batch export/import of state,where relevant state is extracted from the current model (or theinternal state of the browser) at the time of the transfer request, butthe same strategies can be selectively applied to event-orientedmethods, like those used in collaboration and synchronized sessions, aswell. Instead of extracting state from the model, event-oriented methodscan be thought of as tracking events that cause changes to the model asthey occur, before they cause the change to the model, such as in amediated model-view-controller structure, and then replaying the eventsto replicate the corresponding changes to the state of the model. Tofurther clarify that simplification process in terms of such anevent-tracking embodiment, the specifics of what event-related statedetails need be retained and transferred depend on both the nature ofthe activity and the granularity of coordination desired. Simple logicin the browser or exporter can monitor events, and discard those notneeded (such as for being out of scope). This simplifies event tracking,export, and import. For coarse granularity, events may be at the levelof resources visited, loaded and/or presented) Current state could haveno history at all, but could have some defined range of history, sothat, for example, entries within some defined number and path distancecould be saved, and any excess could be deleted. For finer-granularity,edits, forms entries, and intra-resource navigation events could berecorded, but once there is a commitment to the storage layer, or atraverse to a resource that replaces the subject resource, some or allof those may become irrelevant. Alternative embodiments may flush allsuch events, or reduce them to a minimum end-state set that removesthose that are redundant or reflective of a transient intermediatestate.

These simplifications may also involve combining events into new butequivalent composite events that consolidate the effect of multipleintermediate and partial actions. Thus for example, a final set of formsinputs might be retained (to support backtracking), but not anyintermediate actions that were altered. In MVC terms, this can bethought of as maintaining a secondary, parallel model, one specific tomodeling only those aspects and granularities of state relevant totransfers to other models. Such methods can enable considerable economyin retention, transmission, and import of state, particularly if apossible transfer or synchronization is to be enabled long before it isactually requested, and can make it feasible to have such a capabilityactive and in place at all times, unlike less efficient methods thatmight tend to be used more selectively, and thus might not always beready for use when desired.

Because of that, these methods are also useful to parse out redundant orobsoleted events in the case of a collaboration or a simultaneousmultimodal application, in those cases that realtime synchronization isnot active and some set of events is held for future use (such as aftera connection or reconnection), when synchronization is to be establishedbased on this pending event stream. The same simplifying parsing anddeletion functions can be applied, and this may make wider use of suchapplications feasible as well. This simplified method can be used inalternation with full synchronization, so that this secondary,simplified model is maintained locally until synchronization is desired,when it is used in an input event re-feed process to bring the systemsinto initial synchrony, which is then maintained by synchronous eventtransfers, and then reverted to when synchronization is deactivated.These methods apply both to systems of conventional design, and to thoseusing model-view-controller designs. Expressed in MVC terminology, whatthese methods do, in at least one aspect, is enable systems to operatewith independent models, but to coordinate those models when needed, ina simple, low cost manner, regardless of whether based on a centralintermediary, or a purely peer-to-peer process (or some combination).Having independent models can be a significant advantage for systemsthat may be used separately, in disconnected mode and/or in differentapplications, thus enabling ad hoc coordinated use. To make such methodsrobust in the case of a varying number of active and inactive groupmembers (collaboration participants and/or device sets), it might bedesirable to determine synch-points when members enter and leave theactive group that can be used to define intervals that have nomembership change, within which simplifications can safely be made withno risk of affecting a re-activation for a member at an intermediatestate that reflects some but not all flushed events.

Also, while the examples of event stream simplification given here areoriented to browsing events, it will be apparent to one skilled in theart that similar event reduction methods can be defined, based on theprinciples described herein, for event streams relating to many otherapplications. For example, these methods apply with only minoradaptation to a shared/synchronized notepad/editor application, andquite similarly to a shared/synchronized sketchpad. Similarsimplifications for a shared/synchronized calendaring system couldeliminate large numbers of events relating to scheduling of items thatare later deleted or moved. Similar methods can be used for contactmanagers, discussion forums, file management, image management, games,computer-aided design, supply chain management, and othershared/synchronized applications.

Some other methods for simplification of state tracking that may beuseful in some embodiments are noted. One method that can be useful,such as when assembly of a full state export is costly in processing, isto use a hybrid of full state exports and event logs. This may beimplemented in a manner similar to the checkpoint/restart method used indata processing transaction logging, where a full dump or image copy ismade periodically, and an event log is maintained only from the time ofthe last checkpoint. Another form of hybrid is to supplement the purelycurrent internals of a model by maintaining some aspects of state in apartial event log-like form, which may be useful for aspects of state inwhich history is relevant, such as for a browsing navigation history. Itshould also be noted that in synchronizing video to begin viewing at thesame point as the originating system, the need for replay at the newsystem can be avoided by including the current time-position as part ofthe state, and time-normalization methods can be applied, usingcalculated delays, reference time servers, and the like, to adjust fortransmission latency. Thus where a pure event-based synchronizationmethod might have difficulty positioning a stored video to anintermediate time (without playing through it and incurring delay),current time-position data enables random access to the desiredposition.

Security, Privacy, and Digital Rights Management

Allowing sessions to be migrated from one system to another may call forattention to extending current and future methods for ensuring securityand privacy, and for digital rights management (DRM). Such could allowauthorized users to have proper powers on both systems, and to excludeothers and to prevent spoofing or other security flaws. Similarly,depending on the specific context, rights and entitlements to digitalresources, including conditional access and copy protection, couldpresumably be provided to a user without regard to the device set used,or alternatively, with only incremental cost for access from a seconddevice set. This may also involve the use of multiplepoint-of-deployment (POD) modules for hardware-based control of suchfunctions, or an enhanced POD module with support for controllingmultiple systems. Specific methods for doing this relating to useridentities, device identities, network addresses, and otheridentification, certification, and authentication methods will beapparent to those skilled in the art. Further aspects of DRM areaddressed in the discussion of revenue models.

Hypermedia Edit Applications

While most of the examples discussed have focused on browsingpre-defined content, the same principles should be understood to applyto edit applications, and the value of multiple screens is especiallyclear there.

Limited multi-screen edit already is already used for specialized videoediting systems, with editing tasks on the PC that drive viewing of(pure) video on a directly controlled TV monitor. As personal editing ofmusic, video and stills gains popularity, limited editing functions maybe expected to be provided on TV-based home media systems. For examplean APPLE iPhoto-like photo viewer/editor may allow showing slide showson TV. Such a show could be created on the PC, and presented (asread-only) on the TV, but some limited edit could be desirable, such asto change sequence, delete or add images, change timing, etc. This couldbe done purely on the TV system, but here again, the ability toseamlessly transfer that task to a coordinated PC could be desirable.That could permit more complex tasks such as searching a library,enhancing photos, etc., and could allow such tasks to be done inreal-time by one person during a group viewing that continues withoutinterruption. For example, while showing a presentation of vacationpictures to a new girlfriend on a TV screen, the host might decide somephotos of a prior girlfriend should be unobtrusively deleted from theshow. This could be done effectively with a coordinated PC/PDA/tablet,if such functions were well coordinated and commonly used. Similarfunctions could apply to music playlists and compilations, and to videocontent.

It will be understood that such edit applications might draw on eitherpush or pull state transfers, as described above, and that such statetransfers might include cases where a coordinated browsing action isdeferred and where the state information might be built into a link arc.Similar to the asynchronous transfers described above, such applicationsmay be understood to include embodiments in which the state transferrecord might be used to create a link arc that could be caused to beembedded in the resource being edited.

For example, in editing a resource on a PC, it might be desired to pullthe current state of a currently active TV or video program from a TV orother hypermedia player, and use that to create a hyperlink to thatprogram and place it in the edited resource on the PC. The resultingresource created at the PC might then be used as an enhancement resourcefor that TV program. Such a link might be constructed with eitherdirectionality, whether to trigger the edited resource from that pointin the TV program, or, conversely, to activate viewing of that point inthe TV program from the edited resource.

Future hypermedia may also be more readily editable, unlike the currentWeb, but like other hypermedia systems. In that case, coordination ofbrowsing/edit functions might be even more widely applicable. From thisperspective, chat, bulletin board forum services, and Weblogs, and otherforms-driven applications, represent a current, limited form ofbrowser-based editing on the Web, and one where the proposedcoordination could be beneficial, such as to facilitate chat on thePC/PDA/tablet during a TV viewing. For example, the coordination canallow seamless activation of chat associated with the currently viewedTV program, possibly involving a specific set of participants thatregularly chat about that program, such as a specific chat group or roomor instant messaging buddy list group.

Venue/Kiosk-Based Coordination

An application of coordination that highlights the value of coordinatingloosely coupled devices is the case of a venue that provides systems forcoordinated use with customer systems. These may be considered as venueor location-based services that are delivered using a kiosk or otherdevice set provided at the venue.

One example is a hotel, which may have a TV system that provides TV,ITV, and Internet connectivity to guests, in which the guest may connecta portable computer (or PDA) to a network jack. Current systems providesuch services to a PC as simple, uncoupled, network access only. Addingcoordination enables the guest's portable computer to be used as alean-forward device in conjunction with the ITV system. This kind ofloose coupling is essential to the separateprovisioning/ownership/control/security issues of the guest/venuerelationship. Similar services can be provided at airports, Internetcafes, etc. Similar services can also provide full function PC kiosksfor ad hoc use with PDAs. Various well known security measures could beused to control what information is sent from the personal system to thekiosk system, to provide secure transient services on the kiosk that arereliably erased after use, and to certify the integrity of identitiesand such safeguards.

Conversely, the venue-provided TV could be used as an auxiliary displayfor PC-driven content, such as viewing DVDs or playing games (PC orInternet-based).

Similar applications also relate to the advantages of ad hoc use ofindependent PC/PDA devices in home or office contexts (as opposed todedicated, fixed function, multiscreen systems). Other example apps:

-   -   Hotel reservations/guest services/tourist info/T-commerce—video        plus ITV on the TV, shifting to the PC for more        detail/interaction intensive tasks, and tasks that depend on        PC-resident resources    -   Education TV plus adjunct Web/applications—view lecture and        related content on the TV, get supplements on PC (simulations,        references, notes/annotations, and the like)    -   Multiplayer games—main shared view on the TV, controls on the        PC, if available, and optionally add more players on a        bring-your-own PC screen basis        Flexible and Deep Integration with Other Applications

It should be emphasized that coordination functions can extend wellbeyond browser functions to include data/file transfer, distributedtransactions, and Web services between coordinated devices. This addsfurther value to the use of “loose,” ad hoc coordination ofindependently capable and separable devices.

Services on the more personal device can support integration withpersonal applications, ranging from simple file downloading and savingfrom the Web or other hypermedia to deep integration with personalthick-client applications and databases such as INTUIT Quicken and thelike. Such applications might benefit in a wide variety of ways fromboth the differing device set form factor characteristics, and fromcoordinated use of complementary hardware, software and data resources.For example, such applications might apply thick client capabilities orother advanced GUI methods to more fully exploit the high-resolution,lean-forward device set. Some examples are listed in the section abovewith emphasis on the hotel/venue context, but, as indicated, those andother similar examples might apply as well in home and officeenvironments:

-   -   An example of such integration includes seeing financial news on        TV, getting details on ITV (on either the TV or PC), initiating        a stock trade that links to an electronic trading service and a        PC-based portfolio system (like Quicken), and then using the        portfolio analysis system (at the time, such as to evaluate        asset allocation, or later). Wide availability of such        kiosk/venue-based convenience services might add to the appeal        of thick client applications in spite of mobility requirements.    -   Another example might be to use DVR and personalized EPG        functions (on the PC or TV), based on rich personal preference        profiles on the PC, to control use of the TV in a hotel room.    -   EPG applications might also use advanced GUI controls, possibly        using a thick client, to provide a more powerful interface for        browsing a schedule grid, such as with spreadsheet-like GUI        features that can reveal details of a current cell (program) of        interest and can enable rapid scrolling in two dimensions and        across multiple parallel worksheets/grids (for further        dimensions) Also provided may be other advanced data        manipulation controls, such as for viewing genres or        recommendations, perhaps using methods similar to pivot tables.        Such an EPG could combine the power of a thick client PC-based        EPG with an ability to show what is on the TV and change what is        on the TV that is similar to that provided with an on-screen        STB-based EPG. It will be understood that similar functions        might be offered for music, whether on digital radio, TV music        channels, or the like, and might indicate what is on along with        enhancements such as for ordering copies. Such a guide function        might also integrate with media server guide and media asset        management functions.    -   Other applications might also be tuned to MMUI use in        coordination with TV or other video applications such as special        “power” tools for browsing sports statistics and controlling        fantasy league play, or such as game consoles (which may be        virtual). Similar tools could be applied to educational and        distance learning uses of video and hypermedia, adapted to any        of various subject areas. It is noted that video games might be        associated with broadcast or other video programs, such that        coordination of game play with the TV program becomes desirable,        much as described primarily with regard to more basic forms of        browsing. It will be understood that the coordination methods        described herein are fully applicable to coordination of games,        whether using single or multiple device sets. This might include        various methods for specifying a game or portion of a game as an        ending resource, and/or of having game actions cause TV program        changes and/or time-position changes, including the advanced        methods for deep integration with thick clients, as discussed,        the details of which will be apparent to one skilled in the art        based on the teachings herein. It will further be understood        that any such applications or tools are linkable resources, so        that all of the methods described herein for associating        enhancement resources with a viewer's browsing activity are        fully applicable to such resources. Thus, the range of services        that might be associated with browsing activity by these methods        is essentially unlimited, and any specialized services could be        effectively associated with the browsing contexts they might be        relevant to. In this way these methods might not only provide a        set of content resources to enhance starting resources, but also        might link in arbitrary suites of tools suited for use related        to such starting resources.    -   A further example might involve provision of unified messaging        services that couple e-mail and chat and similar messaging        services provided on the TV. Such might be implemented in an ITV        context, with related messaging services on a PC, PDA, and        server-based equivalents such as for cell phone, pager, or        Web-based services. Such a unified environment could provide        integration of mailboxes and message files, contact lists, and        the like.    -   Other similarly integrated extensions of personal productivity        applications, media viewing applications, and other applications        will be apparent to one skilled in the art.

Services on the TV or kiosk device may also benefit from use of thepersonal device for control of that device and its service functions(such as smart remote control of content viewing), and in the case of avenue such as a hotel, for venue-related services, includingtransactions, commerce, and concierge services at a hotel kiosk.

As automation grows, access to such personal applications and databasesfrom any device and for use with any service may become increasinglyimportant. Without coordination of TV and PC devices, it may beimpractical to save information from a TV interactive session for usewith the PC, except through use of an intermediary network-based storagerelay service. Such a service could involve additional steps, andadditional security exposures. Similarly, PC data can be moreeffectively used to better personalize (or be used directly) in the TVsession, as for the hotel DVR/EPG example. This applies broadly touploading or using data resident on the PC, such as personal applicationdata, including personal productivity applications such as contact listsand e-mail and collaboration management, finance and personal businessin conjunction with an ITV session.

Any suitable means of distributed application integration may be used,including remote procedure calls or message oriented requests, and Webservices using SOAP (Simple Object Access Protocol) and XML (and relatedservice discovery and brokerage services such as UDDI, WSDL, and thelike), as well as simple file download/upload. Once serious use of ITVhas begun, it may become increasingly valuable to have full integrationof ITV-based services with PC-based applications. Application-specificintegration methods, such as those using Open Financial Exchange (OFX)and Interactive Financial Exchange (IFX) could also be desirable.

From a broader perspective, it should be understood that thesecapabilities go beyond pure UI capabilities relating to MMUIs and use ofcomplementary form factors, to include rich distributed processingcapabilities that allow multiple systems to be used in browsing, and inrelated activities that integrate advanced and/or specializedprocessing, data access, and service functions from multiple systemsinto the browsing process.

Recapping some earlier discussion of entertainment portals, integrationof a suite of entertainment related functions might have market appeal,and such functions might be delivered using various combination of localthick client function and thin client function that draws on remoteASP-like services. As noted, thick client capabilities tuned to suchneeds might offer particular advantages, such as those relating to UIand data access speed and power. For example, an embodiment of thepresent invention might take the form of a package that includes a thickclient that combines a suite of the entertainment-related functions justdescribed, and that draws on remote resources for content and addedfunctions. Such a package might take the form of a core package thatincludes MMUI browsing support, some additional core features whichmight include EPG functions and/or content and device managementfunctions such as those supportive of a media control center, and one ormore sets of additional functions which might be optional componentssuch as “productivity” suites for interactive tasks relating to sports,movies, news, and the like.

Virtual and Augmented Reality

As device sets and UIs evolve toward rich use of VR, such as inimmersive environments, representations of virtual device sets maybecome more relevant to UI design and usage than the details of howthose representations are implemented, whether using real device sets,or simulations of various input and output artifacts available to theuser (such as display screens, viewing regions, keyboards, buttons,haptic devices, cameras, microphones, and the like). In suchembodiments, MMUI issues apply to the virtual device sets, as well asthe physical ones, and it is coordination of browsing activity acrossthe entire suite of virtual and real device sets to meet the needs ofthe user that is to be desired. The task of providing a MMUI that allowsuser control, in some combination with author recommendations, isessentially independent of whether the device sets are real or virtual.The task of implementing browsers to support those MMUI features,whether on centralized or distributed systems, is essentially asdescribed above. Any adaptations required in any specific VR embodimentwill be apparent to one skilled in the art.

Revenue Models

According to embodiments of the invention, the MMUI features andservices described here may generate revenues in a wide variety of ways,depending in part on whether they are local to a user's site, based onremote services, or venue-based, and on whether they serve the useralone, or facilitate revenue generation indirectly by enablingtransactions, commerce, advertising, or the like. MMUI features can addvalue to device sets and systems, generating revenue in the form ofincrements to device prices, operating system or application softwareprices, or as separate software products. MMUI features and services canalso be offered in conjunction with ITV, Web, DVD, or other hypermediaservices, whether local or remotely based, and thus enable priceincrements on a subscription or item-oriented basis. Those features andservices can also add to the value other remote services, such ase-commerce or information services, and generate revenue by increasingprice or sales volume of those services. Similarly, venue-based servicesmay generate revenue in the form of direct charges based on duration ofuse or units of service, or indirectly by adding to the value and price(or sales) of related services. Services for transport or relay ofsession information and related content, and services relating toportals, may also generate revenue in the form of service fees fromusers, carriage fees from content providers, and advertising orsponsorship fees. Numerous variations on such themes will be apparent toone skilled, for example, in the arts of entertainment, e-commerce,e-business, and system/appliance businesses, and some further detail isprovided in the discussion of various applications herein.

Embodiments in which state information is relayed through an externalservice might be viewed as providing a rich example of the variety ofpossibilities for revenue participation and for the ability to relatesuch revenues directly to MMUI transfers. Users might pay a fee for therelay service, pay on a subscription basis, pay per show, pay per statechange, or pay on some other basis. Advertisers or programmers might payfor such a service. Advertisers might find the ability to link rich andhighly interactive enhancements to TV ads to be very valuable, and mightbe expected to pay for such services based on criteria such as number ofad viewings for which relay is possible (perhaps in a manner analogousto Web ad impressions, pay-per-impression), number for which relay isactivated (perhaps in a manner analogous to click-throughs,pay-per-click), number of activations (such as if multiple activationopportunities per ad are provided, and perhaps also analogous toclick-throughs), number of leads obtained (pay-per-lead), number oftransactions completed (pay-per-transaction), or other such variations.Many of these and similar pricing schemes might be applicable toembodiments providing direct transfer of local state as well.

These methods might also facilitate the ability of advertisers,programmers, and others to offer incentives to user participation thatoperate across multiple device sets. For example, advertisers on TVmight offer incentives to encourage viewers to interact with coordinatedenhancements at their PC. Such incentives might include, for example,games or quizzes, with or without prizes, special offers, lotteries,cash, mileage credits, value points, and/or the like. This could benefitthe advertiser by increasing sales by direct response or by enhancingbrand awareness, benefit the viewer in the form of the incentive offered(perhaps in addition to the inherent service value), benefit the systemor service provider by generating fees from the advertiser or the user,and benefit many parties by incentivising greater use of interactivefeatures and leading to further development of advanced interactivecapabilities.

It should further be recognized that the possibility of providing forfcc the service of transferring browsing to an alternate device set inturn entails the related capability of determining when such service isto be enabled. Thus this introduces a new class of entitlement for whichconditional access control methods might be applied. For example, acable service provider might track entitlements to view specificchannels, perhaps in a manner such as is now done for premium channels,and could similarly track entitlements to enable transfers of staterelated to any or all channels, whether by using external relay methods,or by local communications. Thus a user might subscribe to session statetransfer services for all subscribed channels, or only for certainchannels, or even certain programs, such as on a PPV basis. Suchselective service might also be sponsored by advertisers, whetherbroadly or on an individualized basis. Conditional access technologycould be readily extended to selectively control transfers, based on theteachings herein, as will be apparent to one skilled in the art.

It should be noted further that this method can provide a way to chargefor and control access to the use of links, and it may addresses thecase of third party links as well as embedded links. Such a method ofconditional access and charging for third party links could be appliedmore generally, to any use of third party links, even on a single deviceset. This could be useful if it were held that the use of a resource asthe starting resource for a third party link involved a kind ofintellectual property right belonging the rights holder for thatresource. In such case, the use of this method to provide digital rightsmanagement in the form of conditional control of entitlements to displayor activate third party links to such content could be beneficial inallowing rights holders and others to ensure that uses of such resourcesin conjunction with third party links were only permitted in accord withsuitable business terms, such as payment of fees. Exploiting thisstructure to allow third-parties to freely create new works directlyassociated with and/or linked from existing works while providing forfair compensation to the rights holders of the starting works could formthe economic and operational basis for a major new class of compositeworks. Naturally, if it were held that the owner of a starting resourcehad no such rights relating to third-party links, then an open market inenhancements created and delivered by third parties using the methodsdescribed herein might be developed.

Comprehensive Framework for MMUI Browsing

It is suggested further with regard to the methods described here thatthe whole is far greater than the sum of its parts. In at least oneaspect, these methods provide a comprehensive framework for browsingusing a rich and flexible MMUI, across a wide spectrum of systems,device sets, hypermedia types, and browsing application forms and tasks.By providing a single common framework, a consistent user interface,shared support facilities, and common infrastructure these methods canbe applied in unlimited combinations and extensions to make the use ofMMUI browsing feasible in varied contexts and niche applications inwhich creation of a less comprehensive, specialized point solution maynot be economically feasible, and for which the user learning curve forthe concepts, features, and controls of a specialized system couldseriously limit acceptance and use. The methods provided here and the UIconcepts and metaphors they embody can be broadly applied on aconsistent basis, with only a moderate level of adaptation that is of akind that could be recognized as natural to the context (by both usersand developers), and thus readily understood and implemented. Whileconvergence of TV and computers has been much discussed, this workoffers the first broad method to achieve meaningful convergence in theuser's interface to, and use of, TV and computers.

Stepping back to look at the broad concepts of use of a MMUI, somerepresentative examples of typical useful modes of coordination mayclarify some of the many ways the invention can be used. Implementationsmight offer any or all of these combinations, as well as othervariations. These examples are summarized in the table in Appendix A.

Beginning with the section headed Display Set Options, the first columnlists the major elements of viewing and interaction along the lines ofthe examples of FIG. 3. The next two columns describe display options oneach of the TV and PC/PDA. The last two columns describe the scope ofcommands and other user interactions from each of the TV remote controland the PC/PDA. Some explanatory notes on the table:

-   -   The PIP elements may be implemented, for example, as either a        true hardware PIP in the TV (with two A/V or RF input signals),        or as a software-defined window or frame controlled by a video        compositor and/or computer.    -   Video windows within a browser screen are notable with regard to        how the liberator method for access to a broadcast signal, as        described above, could enable replacing a standard streaming IP        source with a more effective broadcast source.    -   The combinations of display and control may be different for        each element type, or even for different instances of element        types, and standard and customized usage preference profiles        might be used to provide for one or more useful combinations.

A typical use may be that a primary video program be viewed on the TVfor maximum effect (theatrical immersion), and that interactive textsuch as browser screen (or secondary video elements) be viewed on thePC/PDA for ease of reading and interaction, and to avoid disturbingviewing of the ongoing TV program by the interactor or others. Varyinguses of PIP elements then follow this affinity, so for example, aninteractor may optionally see the main TV program image in a secondaryPIP on the PC/PDA, while other viewers may optionally see that relatedinteraction activity in a secondary PIP on the TV, thus viewing the mainprogram without obstruction. The further dimension of how users cancontrol the various Display Set Options is summarized in the section ofAppendix A headed Control Options.

Focusing on the lower levels of system configuration and communicationspaths, the sections headed Direct signal sources and Signal relay listsome of the alternative embodiments in cases where resource inputs maybe directly sourced, or relayed from another device set.

Some additional examples may be helpful to clarify the range offlexibility provided by the methods described herein. These exampleswill highlight the ability to control use of multiple device sets bothwithin the course of a task, such as changing from a lean-back to a leanforward device set as a task becomes more intensive, and formultitasking among tasks that may be more or less related, such as tomaintain coordination among multiple tasks using full MMUI function.This may be illustrated with the example of a group of viewers of TVsports, according to a representative embodiment.

One usage scenario might provide rich multitasking with simpleallocation of MMUI activity by setting all enhancements to be viewed ona coordinated PC. Here the TV and PC might be connected, either locallyor via the WAN, and viewing of any channel on the TV might cause atransfer that places an enhancement resource screen on the PC. Turningto channel A to watch game A could cause the current enhancementresource for game A to automatically appear in a new window on the PC.This screen might be a main page synchronized to the game, and showcurrent play summaries and statistics, with links to supplementarydetails. Such a page might be dynamically synchronized with the game ina manner that employs ATVEF triggers or other methods. During a timeout, a viewer might change to channel B to see what is happening in gameB, and that channel change could cause a transfer that opens a newwindow with a similar main screen for game B. This might be given focusand overlay the screen for game A (it could instead be set to appearbehind it), but the game A screen could still be available by the usualactions, such as clicking on its exposed portion, clicking a task bar,or Alt-Tab keystrokes.

Similarly, a change to channel C to check on game C could have a similarresult, possibly with some maximum number of active windows, withfurther channel changes causing older windows to close (e.g., theleast-recently used, least frequently used or the like). The viewermight then switch back to channel A, and in this case the transfer mightsimply result in the already-open window for game A being returned tofocus. Depending on options selected, that window might show whateverresources were last active in the browsing sub-session related to thatchannel, such as had been left after a period of surfing through variousenhancement resources. Alternately, the window might continue to beresponsive to enhancement triggers from that program, or it might simplybe reset to a main menu screen for the current program in that channel,or some other variation. This might then continue as channels arechanged among the same set of channels, or an evolving set of channels.

A scenario that sticks to a single channel on TV, and uses limitedmultitasking, might instead start with a casual check of enhancementsshown on the TV screen. As more detailed statistics and perhaps play ina fantasy league was pursued, the user might request a transfer to a PCfor lean-forward interaction, possibly removing all overlays from theTV. This action might continue, and on seeing some screen of generalinterest to other viewers, the PC user might transfer that current PCWeb page to the TV to be rendered in a variant form suited to the TV.Multiple viewers might each have PC devices, and might individuallyselect the same or different contexts to be transferred to theirindividual PCs for independent use. Some overlay screens might alsoremain active on the TV, including the case of some screens for a givenchannel on the TV and some for that channel on the PC. Enhancementresources might also include video such as instant replays, alternatecamera angles, and the like, and such resources might also be viewed oneither device set.

In conducting such MMUI sessions, the viewer might use the PC screen ona more or less active and continuous basis. Just as visual bugs on theTV screen have been found useful to cue viewers to the availability ofenhancement materials, similar cueing might be desirable in MMUIapplications, for instance, when such enhancements are not ubiquitousand/or not expected to be ever-present. Such might be the case, forexample, during early deployments, off-hours, and/or on channels withlimited enhancement coverage. Similar visual cues on the TV might beapplied in such cases, but alternative cueing methods might also bedesirable, using any of a variety of viewer-sensible cues.

One method might be to provide such cues at the PC. Such PC-based cuescould, for example, be visual (e.g., blinking of flashing indicators oralert windows), object level cues (such as selective marking of specificobjects in the video image), and/or audible signals. Such audiblesignals might be useful, for example, in cases where the PC is put asidewhen not in active use. In any case, a distinctive set of such cues,such as different tones or blink patterns, could be offered to signaldifferent sorts of enhancements. These might differentiate morespecific, time-sensitive or time-related, and/or otherwise importantenhancements from other, more basic enhancements. Such multi-level cuesmight be of value, for instance, in distinguishing generic enhancementsthat might have only a basic level of relevance to the program (e.g., ageneric menu screen or generic reference data) from more specificenhancements that, for example, add significant value to specificprogram segments.

A scenario that combines both multi-tasking and variable use of the MMUIdevice sets might involve using a TV to view main menu overlays on theTV. The overlays might automatically appear in synch with any currentchannel or only on command. Initial interactions might be done on the TVby one or more viewers using standard remote controls, or using theirPC/PDA device sets as remote controls. At some point, a user mightrequest a transfer from the TV to the PC. Similar actions might be takenfor additional channels, leading to a status like that in the firstexample with three games being viewed but with some mix of screens onthe TV and the PC. Further channel changes might synchronize enhancementscreens on either or both devices. Thus there might be active screens orwindows on both the TV and PC associated with each of several channels.The TV screens might be seen only when the channel is on, while the PCwindows might remain open but change focus as channels change on the TV.A user might thus watch several games in such a surfing mode, with fullycoordinated enhancement viewing on both the TV and the PC.

Similar coordination of multiple sub-sessions might be applied toreplays, whether broadcast or effected locally using a DVR, withenhancement screens related to both the live program and the replaysegment. Multiple viewers might do the same, possibly with differentsets of resources on their private lean-forward devices. PIP functionscould add a further level of multitasking, and that also couldcoordinate with alternate device sets. Such a rich and intensive levelof interaction might at first seem unduly difficult by current standardsof TV use, but an emerging population of increasingly skilled heavymedia users would likely find this kind of rich multitasking to behighly satisfying. In the scenarios just described, the transfers thattrack the channel changes might be predominantly push transfers. Theoriginal activation might be either by push or pull.

As noted above, such methods could also be applied to heterologousmultimodal sessions. One example might be to coordinate telephone callswith ITV activity, such as by providing a “place call request” controlwithin an enhancement resource and/or associated with the video programitself. Such a place call control could be used with commercials tofacilitate direct response. Embodiments could include, among others,sending the transfer request to a remote server to effect an outboundcall from a call center, such as via an ITV back-channel or via theInternet, or sending the request to an intelligent phone at the consumerlocation that calls inbound to a call center. With such approaches, forexample, the place call control could be used from either or both of aTV or PC/PDA device set, as determined by the user and/or the author.

While the above examples have been described primarily in terms ofchannel-oriented realtime program viewing, the same capabilities arereadily provided in more individualized cases where trick-play is used,where programs are obtained on demand, and/or where programs arepersonalized as to content. Embodiments might have varying distributionof viewing control functions, such as in the STB or head-end, so thatstate relay might take various routes depending on what communicationpaths are available and where the information is most convenientlyobtained.

Further information regarding embodiments applied to advertising contentwill now be provided. It should be understood that ads could be treatedas being separate programs of a special kind and related to a primaryprogram. Accordingly, as in the examples above relating to channelchanges, the start of a commercial might trigger the opening of a newscreen or window for enhancement content relating to that ad. Suchtriggering might be done in a variety of ways, such as, for example,using special logic related to insertion of commercials, or based onATVEF triggers. Alternatively, such coordination could be doneasynchronously, as described earlier, to allow for later activity thatdoes not interfere with realtime viewing of the base program or otherfollowing ads.

In addition, various techniques might be applied to individually targetads to addressable households or individuals. Such may serve to shiftfrom the group broadcast model of TV to the one-to-one targeted,personalized, and customized model of Web advertising. Such models maytranslate rather directly to streamed Internet delivery and to VOD cabledelivery in which the program stream is inherently directed at aspecific target receiver, and may also be adapted to more traditional TVgroup distribution modes. For example, some such schemes might combine atraditional channelized delivery of regular programming with specialmethods for inserting ads into time slots on an individual basis.

In general, personalized ads involve having multiple alternative adsand/or component parts of ads (perhaps including dynamically created,data driven, individualized elements) which might be selected fortargeted presentation based on various individual and/or householdcharacteristics such as location, demographics, psychographies, history,behavior, interests, channel and program viewed, and/or the like.Embodiments could vary in where the selection is done, such as at the TVor STB, or at the head-end (possibly in a special ad server or insertionsystem), or even by the user. In any such case, the identity of the adthat is shown may not correspond to the channel that is tuned to for thebase program. In the case of VOD, the channel might be a specialcustomized channel, and in the case of channel-oriented programming, theads might be selected and inserted into an ad slot without beingdetermined by the particular channel that the base program is on. Insuch cases, a program identifier for the ad might be used as therelevant state information that identifies the ad as a startingresource, and associates it with links to enhancement resources.

Various embodiments might obtain that state information directly fromthe STB, or via relay through the head-end. Alternatively, someembodiments might exploit availability of that information from withinthe head-end, or an associated ad server, such as in the case where theselection is determined or at least known at the head-end (perhapsacting as a distributed ASP-style support service to the STB). The samemethods could be applied to services that might use similar dynamicmethods to customize programming other than ads.

It is noted also that the sorts of MMUI usage just described, withmulti-channel TV viewing and associated use of multiple Web sites and/orother similar resources, may cause new opportunities for advancedtargeting of advertising messages to arise. Thus, instead of targetingto a specific program, and possibly a specific TV user, and separate,independent targeting of a Web visitor at a given Web site (which may ormay not be inherently related to the TV program), ads can be targetedbased on the combination of resources viewed and the dynamic behavior ofthat activity.

For example a user watching game A might see one ad, but a user watchinggame A and B as well as both corresponding Web sites might see anotherad. A user shifting only occasionally from one channel to another mightsee one ad, and one moving rapidly back and forth might see another.Thus any combination of resources and dynamics (e.g., both resourcehistory and timing or pace) might be used to differentiate targets.Advertisements might also be used to influence viewers of one channel toswitch to another. Such counter programming ads are not used onconventional TV, but in the more complex environment of multi-resource,multi-channel, MMUI viewing, this might be attractive and valuable.Similarly, it should be understood that in the case of custom assembledads, such as those provided by the VISIBLE WORLD system, the enhancementresources presented might vary with the specific combination of adcomponents selected. Combining both embodiments could enableenhancements to depend on both the specific TV ad customization(s)applied and on any concurrent viewing of other channels and of otherenhancement resources, such as those associated with the other channels.

Embodiments of these methods may be oriented primarily to advertisingrather than the base programming, and in such cases, specialcoordination portals of the sort described above might be specificallyoriented to commercial content. In any case, incentives might beprovided to viewers to encourage viewing of such commercialenhancements. Incentives might be related to simply having a device setactively connected to such a portal, to responding to interactiveelements of any kind, and/or to particular kinds of interactions ortransactions.

Another example of a beneficial use of the methods described hereinrelates to providing increased flexibility in the use of basicinformation overlays or add-ons such as those that are presentlyincluded in non-interactive television services. It has becomeincreasingly common for some programs, such as news and sportsprogramming, to contain information overlays in the form of tickers orbanners or similar formats at the margins of the screen, including richcombinations of elements. Such materials are essentially forced, defaultenhancements. Some may cover portions of the TV image, and others maycause the image to be shrunken to make room for the added information,but in either case, the primary program video image is compromised, andthe result may annoy or distract many viewers.

The methods described herein enable such forced enhancements to be mademore flexible and discretionary, so that they can be enabled from view,disabled from view, rearranged, and/or selectively transferred to analternate device set. For viewers who use a PC as secondary device setto view such programs, the ability to transfer such enhancements to thePC could be highly desirable. As described, control of such targetingmight be done as needed by viewer command and/or set in advance aspreferences. Further, such control might address cases when a secondscreen is or is not active, specify different behaviors for differentclasses of such enhancements, and/or provide for multiple alternativesettings that can be selected by the viewer or based on set criteria.Such flexible handling of enhancement content, including enhancementsthat are pushed to the viewer, could, for instance, enable viewers tousefully receive and/or work with a broad range of information servicesthat could have widely varying degrees of relation to current programviewing. These might include, for instance, broad portal-type services,and might be particularly useful for alerting services, such as, forexample, news alerts, financial alerts, and/or for extensions to theEmergency Broadcast System, providing new levels of power and richness.

Deployment Staging Considerations and Alternative Approaches

As discussed herein, MMUI services in support of coactive browsing mightbe embodied in a variety of configurations capable of suiting varyingstages of introduction in varying environments. Fuller and/or morecleanly integrated embodiments might involve direct integration withcoordinating devices and systems (e.g., STBs), perhaps includingsoftware support and/or suitable network connections among cooperatingdevices in the home. Less deeply integrated embodiments might involve“pasting-on” or “bolting-on”, perhaps via the use of adapter devicesand/or circuitous network paths. In various implementations, less directand integrated embodiments might serve as evolutionary paths to moreintegrated embodiments.

It will be further apparent from the teachings herein that coordinationof TV viewing with related Web activity might be desirable, and that byextension, even crude levels of coordination might be valuable toviewers, programmers, and advertisers. Aspects of the methods describedherein for providing a portal for coordinating Web and TV activity canbe beneficially applied in basic, partially automated form even withoutthe direct, automatic coordination afforded by the state transfer andtracking methods described herein.

A basic benefit of MMUI coordination is that a viewer's access toresources on the Web is placed into a degree of correspondence with whatthey are viewing on TV. Still, in various embodiments, a limitedapproximation of full synchronization and automatic following ofactivity across device sets might be employed. A cleverly effectedportal service that is personalized to the user's viewing habits mightprovide a semi-automated coordination service that delivers a level ofvalue, especially for certain types of viewing. Such functionality couldallow for use across channels and/or program alternatives withreasonable and useful correlation to program content, despite lack offull and/or automatic coordination with actual viewing. In theimplementation of such embodiments, thought might be given to how mucheffort is required to use such a portal relative to alternatives lackingsuch coordination support, and/or how much value that support adds.

Without any portal service or direct coordination, viewers might be ableto obtain Web resources associated with TV programming that is viewed onan independent system only by navigating to a Web site that might bespecifically associated with the program being viewed. This wouldrequire a viewer to know how to find such a Web site, and to activelynavigate to it whenever access is desired. Such navigational burdenlimits the appeal and usability of such services to highly motivated andwell-informed viewers. An effective cross-channel portal service couldsignificantly reduce that navigational burden, for example, by oftenmaking accurate prediction of what a user might be viewing.

Further, such a portal service might be useful even when it predictsincorrectly. For example, in various embodiments an incorrect predictioncould act to narrow alternatives and/or provide navigation aids suchthat only some few manual steps are needed to find the desiredresources. As a specific example, the portal might load a resource forthe program deemed most likely, but might also provide convenient directlinks to the next most likely programs, perhaps organized in order oflikelihood, so that a near miss would add only one click to get the userto the correct resource. Further navigation structures could organizeall likely alternatives for rapid selection.

Such a portal might differ from the functions provided by a programguide (EPG), for example, in that it might reduce the need choose amongalternatives by giving preference to programs, perhaps including ads,that are currently airing or about to air, and linking not todescriptions of the program suitable for use to select viewing, butrather to enhancements useful to those who are already viewing theprogram. Such enhancements might include, for instance, enhancements forcoactive viewing of related and/or supplementary information. Suchfunctionality be applicable, for example, to both scheduled andon-demand programming. It will be understood, however, that suchenhancement-related functions might be combined with and provided as anextension of a program guide service, just as integration with generalpurpose portals was previously suggested, and it is noted that suchintegration might offer added data for inference of current viewing, asdescribed below.

To make such estimates of likely viewing behavior in the absence ofdirect, precise, and/or accurate state information, and to otherwisenarrow the options to a small set of likely programs, a portal servicemight draw on any or all of a variety of estimation methods based onother kinds of available information about the viewer and his viewingcontext. Such methods might include any of the techniques generally usedto personalize, customize, adapt, and apply learning and external datain other kinds of Web-based services, as well as methods specificallyoriented to TV viewing context and behavior, and might particularlyinclude some combination of the following:

-   -   A portal might draw on program guide schedule information, which        along with knowledge of the viewer's zip code, metropolitan        area, TV programming distribution service, and/or current time,        could limit its scope to programs currently airing and        accessible to that viewer. Similarly, the subset of        video-on-demand options could also be narrowed.    -   A portal might draw on personal preferences and/or behavioral        data that indicate a viewer's habits and tastes to make        estimates of probable viewing behavior. Such personal        preferences and/or behavioral data could include, for instance,        data relating to TV viewing, Web browsing, and/or other        activities. Personal preferences and/or behavioral data could        range in level, perhaps including factors such as channels or        networks, specific shows, genres, actors, subjects, and/or the        like, and/or how such factors vary by time-of-day, recent        behavior and task work style, participation of other household        members or guests, and the like. Combined with program guide        data, such information could allow for reasonably accurate        predictions of viewing at given times.    -   A portal might collect feedback on browsing behavior, such as        clickstreams, including clickstreams associated with program        enhancements relating to particular programs and/or sets of        programs. The portal might analyze such clickstreams to learn        when its estimations were confirmed by viewing and related        browsing and/or when navigation to resources related to other        programs was done, the latter perhaps being suggestive of        prediction errors. Such feedback might be from an individual        user, and/or might draw on the behavior of other users        identified as being similar, such as with collaborative        filtering techniques.    -   A form of clickstream data could be obtained in relation to the        use of a program guide service, which, as described above, might        be usefully combined with a portal. The most recent click on a        currently airing/available program entry in an EPG might, in        various embodiments, be employed as an estimator of the        currently viewed program, and other recent clicks on currently        airing/available programs might, in various embodiments, be        employed in determining likely alternatives. Prior history        patterns relating to use of the EPG might also be employed in        estimating the currently viewed program. Thus integration of        such EPG services might both add value to the viewer, as a        TV-related service that benefits from MMUI coactivity, and add        to the effectiveness of the portal as a semi-automated linking        portal.    -   A portal might also be specialized, for instance relating to a        specific genre or group of programs such as news, movies,        sports, games, reality shows, kids shows, and/or the like. Such        specialization could further narrow the options and make use as        a coordination tool more effective.    -   The kinds of data just described might be obtainable        automatically from various sources, including external databases        and information sources, or by advance entry of personal        preference and other context data that can be used on an ongoing        basis. In some embodiments, such data might be obtainable by        environmental sensing, both with regard to the viewing activity,        and more broadly.

Broadly speaking, such methods might offer a way to give a portalcontext-awareness, based on a wide variety of inputs other than specificknowledge of the TV viewing state or direct entry by the user at thetime of viewing. This might be viewed as a particular case ofcontext-aware computing, one that draws on information related to TVviewing for a given user or set of users at a given time and place, andthis might be considered an aspect of synchronicity. Suchcontext-awareness might then enable the portal to usefully support MMUIbrowsing even lacking definite information on TV state. It will also beapparent to one skilled in the art, based on the teachings herein, thatdetermining context based on knowledge of a schedule of external events,the time, and/or the preferences of a user (e.g., as predefined and/oras subject to automated learning based on observed behavior and explicitor implicit feedback) might be applied to a large class of context-awarecomputing tasks unrelated to browsing.

Further discussing the use of such a portal in navigation to TV-relatedenhancement content, the actions taken by a user will now be considered.As described earlier, the viewer might have his PC set up to include aportal toolbar that is always present and connected to the portalservice. Lacking that, the viewer might merely navigate to the portalmanually, such as using a well-known single URL, or possibly using abookmark or home page setting or similar shortcut. The user could belogged in to the portal, so that the portal could apply its methods onan individual basis to predict likely current viewing behavior. Vieweridentify might be switchable among household members as desired throughmanual logon controls, or inferred based on analysis of viewer behavioror other information. A resource that provided enhancements for thepredicted program (e.g., a main menu page for the program) or for thecurrent segment of the program might, for instance, be automaticallyloaded at the start of viewing and/or at set intervals (e.g., everyhalf-hour and/or at scheduled program end times), and/or might berefreshed and/or altered at appropriate times (e.g., according totriggers and/or other cues identified as being for that program).

In addition, a supplementary menu of links to enhancement resources forlikely alternative programs might also be presented, whether as a simplelist, or with advanced controls such as a drop-down. Thus in cases wherethe portal predicted correctly, the effect would be equivalent to thatof a fully automated coordination portal. Where the prediction wasincorrect, a single click might often be sufficient to reach the correctenhancement resource, and thus serve as a useful near equivalent to theeffect of full automation. In either case, the portal could learn whichoutcome occurred and use that information to seek to improve its futurepredictions. For the richer variety of VOD offerings, and/or use with aDVR or other home media archive, a more extensive navigation facilitymight be provided, again possibly exploiting knowledge of the relevantVOD provider's current offerings and/or DVR archive contents possibly incombination with knowledge of user preferences and behavior.

Such semi-automated portals might be particularly effective, forinstance, when applied to limited programming categories, such asspecific genres or niche uses. These might include any of the following,and/or other similar uses:

-   -   News, and the subcategory of financial news, with enhancements        relating to current news stories, related prior stories, and        associated reference material, and the like. Unlike a        conventional network or other news site, this might be organized        to highlight stories just aired and related enhancements,        possibly including time of airing and a key, possibly with a        time log for aid in navigation.    -   Sports, with enhancements related to game, team, player, and        league statistics, scores, fantasy games, and the like. Unlike a        conventional network or league site, this might be organized to        highlight the game predicted to be viewed, as well as other        likely alternatives viewable at the same time.    -   Movies, with enhancements related to cast, credits, reviews, and        the like, as well as sales of DVDs. Unlike current network        sites, this might highlight movies on multiple channels, and        unlike movie databases, it might feature the particular movie        predicted to be viewed.    -   Games, with enhancements related to the TV game, or related        games, including at-home competitions—with cross-channel        coverage    -   Reality programs, with enhancements related to audience        participation, including voting, chat, bulletin boards, and the        like, as well as supplementary video and other content    -   Music, with enhancements related to artist, album, and        background and the like, and sales of CDs—with cross-channel        coverage.    -   Similarly for documentaries, series, and other genres.

As noted for some of the above, enhancements for any of these or othercategories might also support “t-commerce” sales related to the programcontent, as well as enhancements to advertising that enableself-service, deeper interaction, and transactions. It will beunderstood that the enhancements provided through such a service might,but need not, include enhancements offered by the programmer of the TVprogram. A variety of enhancement channels might be provided, relatingto programming and/or advertisements, with selection among themcontrolled by the portal provider and/or the viewer, as described above.

It should be noted that the genre of news inherently has a level ofcross-program synchronicity that might be usefully exploited to offer asemi-automated service that provides high value. Many programmingservices (channels) provide news, but all are based on inherent externalsynchronization to the actual occurrence of news events. Thus while eachchannel differs in the details of news item selection and treatment,most of the items covered within a relevant interval of programming,such as a half hour news program, might be largely the same.

Accordingly, if a semi-automated portal were specific to news, it mightbe marketed to frequent news viewers, and even when its predictions of aspecific channel were wrong, the enhancements might be largely relevantanyway. For example, the viewer might be able to use the “incorrect”enhancements with only minor disadvantage, or to easily change to thecorrect channel to get the small improvement that would offer. Further,it might be that news viewers have high network/channel loyalty, so thata favorite channel might be preset or learned, and re-set when thatchanges. Such preferences might be specific to time of day, and toindividual viewers in a household. In such cases, the predicted channelwould often be the correct one. Since such viewers might still changechannels occasionally, such as when major news is happening, such acombination of favorite channel prediction with convenient cross-channelcapability might be very useful, and relatively simple to implement.Similar methods would apply to any other content that has a high levelof synchronicity across channels, and/or a high level of channelloyalty.

It will also be understood that such a semi-automated coordinationportal might be suited to early implementations of services that couldbe put into use without any need for cooperation of key TV industryparticipants, such as distributors, programmers, and STB and middlewareproviders, and with standard home entertainment and PC/PDA devices thatneed not be linked to one another. As described above, third partiesmight provide enhancement services for use in such an implementation.Such practices might or might not involve intellectual property rightsof the TV programmers that own the rights for the programs that serve asstarting resources. It will be further understood that while such portalservice functions are described as being provided by a remote Web-basedportal, equivalent functions at any of the levels described here mightalternatively be deployed in local, thick client form, or otherembodiments, as well. Similarly, it will be understood that some or allinformation on current programming schedules might be downloaded inadvance, and used with regard to current time, rather than obtained atthe time of use.

One alternative embodiment of the portal methods described herein mightbe based on SMS or similar services, such as using a cell phone or PDA.SMS-based enhancement services have been used in Europe to enable TVviewer response and participation. Similar to going to a known programWeb page in prior synch-TV embodiments, a caller can register their cellphone at a specific cell phone number (or Web site) to receiveprogramming alerts and interact with a given program. Again, such priorservices are currently program-specific, but the methods describedherein might be applied to allow a cell phone to be registered to across-program portal service, and receive such alerts and interact atany time, or to be activated and deactivated as desired with a simpleactivation message.

A further alternative, which might be used in place of or in combinationwith the above methods, is to use communication methods which might beunreliable or which might require viewer action to provide more or lessreliable indications of viewing state. For example, as describedpreviously, liberator configurations, particularly the example of simplyusing an IR sensor packaged with a PC, might provide state signals thatare not reliably received and/or that require double entry by theviewer. Such signals might provide unreliable cues to current channel,or might involve a semi-automatic form of coordination control drawingon limited user input, that might at times be simpler than the aboveexample in which inferences are corrected by user action at the PC. Forexample, the viewer simply pointing the remote at the PC and repeatingthe channel entry command might serve to maintain desired coordination,whether instead of or in addition to the inference methods justdescribed.

Broadly speaking, the alternatives described might be viewed as fallinginto three general levels of sophistication, which might correspond topossible levels of market introduction and deployment:

-   -   A basic level is the semi-automated coordination service just        described. While the utility of such a service might be more        limited that the other levels, it might be put into service with        relatively limited resources and with little or no industry        support.    -   An intermediate level is the fully automated coordination        service based on any of the various “paste-on” or indirect        methods described, such as those referred to as liberator        configurations, or similar variations. These might provide full        service, but possibly with some awkwardness of setup or        inefficiency that might limit the extent of consumer acceptance        and use. Intermediate level solutions might also include        embodiments that provide automation in one direction, and not        the other, such as for example, one in which the PC        automatically coordinates to the TV, through either a local or        remote path, but in which coordination from the TV to the PC is        semi-automated, or vice versa.    -   A third level is the fully integrated service that is fully        supported by the participating device sets and systems. This        might have the advantage of being totally seamless and without        any barriers to user installation and setup, other than for        changing default preferences to individualized setting, but        might be most demanding of hardware not currently deployed.

As noted above, in categorizing alternative methods of automatedcoordination, an additional dimension of distinction can be viewed asthat between those that rely on linkbase information being distributedwith the primary program, and those that make a separate association ofsuch linkbase information with a program. Many of the methods describedherein with regards to portals relate to separate associations, and tothe use of alternative associations that such methods may facilitate.Alternative embodiments may rely on linkbase information distributedwith the primary program, such as in the form of ATVEF triggers or otherencoded forms of URLs or other embedded linking codes, and/or directinclusion of such resources with the program distribution. Such methodsmay effectively specify a specific set of enhancement resources.

Nevertheless, it will be understood by one skilled in the art based onthe teachings herein that a variety of methods, such as, for example,proxy servers or other methods of intermediation and translation oflinks, including redirection, might be used to redirect such links toalternate sets of ending resources, while drawing on the supplied set ofstarting resource specifications, and thus to achieve similar results.One might think of the direct distribution method as a case of beingpushed from the TV program to the enhancements, and indirect method asone of pulling from the TV program to the enhancements. Use ofalternative enhancement sets might seem somewhat more natural in thecase of pulling, but might be applied to the case of pushing as well,perhaps, for example, in the manner just described.

It will be apparent that such alternative linkbases might be createdusing any appropriate methods, including those of the kind typicallyused by original programming producers, whether done in advance of use,and/or in real time as a program is broadcast. Methods particularlysuited to independent and realtime production might draw on preparedresources and automated and/or semi-automated realtime processes foridentifying subject matter in starting resources and creating links toenhancement resources that are dynamically assembled from the preparedresources. Such methods might draw on the various techniques already inuse for the similar tasks of automated and semi-automated production ofconventional Web content.

Appropriate methods for identifying subject matter in video startingresources might include reference to program guides and other externalmetadata, reference to metadata included with the program, includingclosed-caption data, and recognition of audio and visual elements orfeatures of the program. Semi-automated methods might be desirable todraw on automated methods, while supplementing them with human judgment,insight, and oversight. It will be understood that processes forassociation of starting and ending resources based on these or othersimilar methods might be provided as services. These services might beprovided for fee to providers of content resources, both startingresources and ending resources, to enhance the value of such content andthe ability to market that content. Such services might be based on anyof various combinations of software, ASP-like automated services, andservices based on editorially created associations, whether asindependent services, or as part of a linking portal.

As a variation on these methods, it will also be understood thatintegration of a coordination portal service with the VOD orderingservice of a cable operator or other programming distributor might alsoprovide the PC with direct knowledge of such programs being viewed onthe TV. Since such VOD programming is generally controlled from thehead-end, such coordination of state might be fully achievable with nospecial communication with the STB. Further, instead of controlling VODservices exclusively from the TV, such integration might bebi-directional, enabling PC/Web based control that might offer many ofthe various advantages described herein for enhancement viewing, andother features, including powerful PC-based program guide services. Suchmethods might also be permitted to interoperate with conventionalTV-based control of VOD services, and notification of such activitymight also be relayed to the PC from the VOD servers at head-end, evenif other state changes that might be targeted to the STB, such as simplechannel changes, for example, are not similarly relayed.

Also, as described above, similar coordination relating toadvertisements might be driven using information from ad servers, andsuch coordination might be a valuable commerce enabling service initself. It is further noted that even in cases where a coordinationportal is operated independently of the TV system operator, andintegration with VOD operations might be limited, linkage of such aportal to a VOD operator's service might be valuable to the operator toprovide the advanced program guide and VOD ordering services such aportal might offer. In such cases, fees might be payable by the VODoperator for such order generation and placement services. As describedabove, various user identification, authentication, and securitymeasures might be applied to ensure the integrity of such processing ofVOD orders from the open Internet, in contrast to the conventional caseof such orders originating from the STB to which the order is to beserved, and having a known location/identity within a closed cablenetwork that is typically under an operator's full control.

It is further noted that such a capability for external placement of VODorders, such as from the Web, can be valuable in providing broaderinteroperability between Internet-based services, and those usingspecialized transport facilities such as cable or satellite TVdistribution. For example, a cable TV distribution network might be aneffective way to distribute high-quality video to homes, even if thatvideo is found on the Web, and regardless of whether it is to be viewedon a TV or on a PC. More particularly, consider the example of BMW Filmspromotional videos, which were first offered on the Web, via streaming,and more recently made available on cable TV VOD systems. Theseofferings are currently totally independent, in that all Web requestsare streamed via IP to the PC, and all VOD requests are selected fromthe TV and sent to the TV.

Using the methods described herein, a user might select a film from theBMW Web site, using a PC (or, alternatively, using Web access via theTV), and order it to be delivered via the user's cable VOD service. Theavailability of such video to the VOD system might be prearranged, as iscurrently the case for BMW films, or might be enabled dynamically, suchthat any video source might be connected to a VOD service head-end. Itwill also be understood that while viewing on the TV might be thedefault result, home network facilities might also enable viewing on aPC, whether the one that placed the order, or another one. Thismixed-facilities transport might be done using any suitable formats,protocols, and controls, including, for example cases of conversion fromIP to specialized cable/VOD formats/protocols with possible reverseconversion in the home, such as for PC/Web viewing), or cases oftunneling of IP packets through the cable/VOD protocols for simpleextraction in the home, and including cases in which channels and/orbandwidth normally reserved for VOD are allocated to suchInternet-sourced traffic.

Such methods might be valuable for distributing content from commercialsources, as well as from independent video sources, such as ATOM FILMSor THE FEED ROOM. A variety of business models might be applied in suchembodiments. Carriage fees might be charged by cable or satelliteoperators to content sources, and/or fees might be paid by suchdistributors for premium content. The distributors might in turn, chargesuch premium content fees directly or indirectly to the viewers thatorder the video. This might be thought of as having the effect of makingthe cable or satellite distribution path serve as just another form ofrouting for Internet services, even if the protocols are not Internetprotocols, thus effectively embedding those facilities into theInternet, thus making them more broadly useful.

From this perspective, it can further be seen that such an effect offunctional integration of TV or other specialized media distributionfacilities into the Internet can enable the full range of interactiveservices and business models to exploit that embedded video distributionchannel. For example, the methods of “smart syndication” previouslyproposed for simple Web-based media, in which customized content iscreated with the intention that it be intelligently targeted to and/orselected by small sets of viewers, or even a single viewer, and used asa carrier for commercial messages and/or interaction opportunities thatare targeted to appeal to those particular viewers, might be adaptedusing the methods described herein to work with VOD or other customizedTV services as an outbound video channel, and to use the Web as aninbound interaction channel. It will be understood that such outboundvideo might be customized dynamically, with all of the flexibilitynormally associated with Web-based content. Thus such a coactivecombination of TV and Web media could give the effect of a single,integrated, closed-loop, intelligent medium, with all of the power ofthe Web for personalized interaction and customized, dynamic content andservices, while exploiting all of the power of specialized videodistribution facilities to deliver captivating, high-end videoexperiences, including HDTV and other advanced DTV services.

Extending the discussion of enhancement services, another class of suchservices might be those that provide a particular kind of supportfunctions across all kinds of programming. One simple but useful exampleof such a service is the “what is on now” service. Such a service iscurrently available in single-screen, centralized TV systems, in theform of the EPG “info” function that gives information on the programthat is currently active. As noted above, the methods described hereinenable an MMUI service in which this EPG-like info function is providedat an alternate device set. This model of a simple function to indicate“what” might be extended similarly to other common information needs,such as who, where, when, how, why, and the like.

One very useful example is a “who is on now” service, which might bereferred to as a “who-bot” or more accurately a “whonowbot.” Such aservice might use a simple command, such as a single key entry, toinvoke the “who” function, which might then produce a list of the peoplewho are on screen at the moment. For movies and dramatic programming,the results might be the subset of the cast list that corresponds to thecurrent scene, possibly both role name and actor name. For news anddocumentaries, it might list the announcers and the subjects of a scene.For sports this function might list the players active in a currentplay, as well as coaches or officials on screen.

It will be apparent from the teachings herein that such a whobot servicemight be created by using a combination of knowledge and or inference ofthe program currently active obtained using any or all of the methodsdescribed, combined with pre-existing, or specially created databasesthat relate people to time within a program, including databases createdin realtime as the program airs, to infer who is on-screen, and selectedby any of a variety of inference methods. Such methods might draw oninformation organized by patterns of channel, program, people, times,topics, genres, and other such factors. It is noted that processing ofclosed caption data might be a particularly good source of data for suchuses. It will be understood that such information might also beobtained, perhaps more directly, by image recognition, but the othermethods described herein might avoid the difficulties of such a task.

Whatever the methods, the result might be a list of people and/or roles,in order of likely interest, for each of the one or more programsinferred as being the likely intended current program that is thesubject of the request. Such a whobot result might be presented as aspecial screen in response to a who command, and/or might be a defaultor optional service perhaps included in a portal control panel and/orsimilar area of a screen. Such a portal control panel and/or similararea of a screen might be left active and/or visible. It is furthernoted that such a portal control and/or similar area of a screen mightupdated automatically and/or continuously, and/or on command, asdesired. The service might then in turn provide links for each suchperson to related information, filmography, biography, and other relatedcontent, and/or related products, such as CDs, DVDs, or othermerchandise.

As an additional level of intelligence, this service might learn aboutwho the viewer knows and shows interest in, both to rank the candidatepeople responses, and possibly to provide an option to exclude peoplethat the viewer is very likely to know well already, and thus presumablydoes not intend to be asking about. Such learning might exploitcategories as described above, and might also apply collaborativefiltering methods to draw on knowledge of others with similar interests.

Further to the who service and the what service, similar methods will beapparent based on the teachings herein for other services. For example,a where service might give the location of what is being viewed and/orof where the program originated from. As another example, a when servicemight place program content and/or its creation in time, how, whichmight give background on how the program was made and/or on how anactivity being shown is performed. As yet another example, a why servicemight give background on the motivation of the subjects and/or creators,and other similar functions. By, for instance, focusing on simplerepetitive tasks, much of the difficulties of more broad-based inferencetasks might be avoided. The methods need not interpret the meaning ofthe question and the intended form of response—those are given, and arehighly repetitive. Accordingly, simple inference and learning processescan be applied with good result within that constrained, bututilitarian, formulation.

Using the whobot as an example, it is noted that such a service might bevaluable in other contexts, unrelated to media viewing. For example,such a service might be desirable in the real world, to indicate who iswithin a particular vicinity. Such a service will be illustrated with aPDA as an example, but it is noted that such a service could takevarious forms, and could work with any of various devices.

A PDA whobot might respond to a single command and present a list of thepeople a user might be expected and/or wish to know that are known orinferred to be in the user's vicinity and presumably visible. This mightbe done by using both context and database information, in combinationwith inference methods, and all keyed to the real time as of now as therelevant context for inference, and as the common point of reference formaking associations with other data. The databases might include apersonal organizer, and the context data might include location datafrom a schedule and/or from a GPS or other location service, as well asdata on relationships, such as to infer that if the user has a meetingwith person 1 now, he might be asking about person 2 who is a colleagueor friend of person 1. This might also include a history database, andlearning processes to tune the inference process. As with the TV whobot,the rankings might be weighted by who the user knows well, and would notbe likely to be asking about, and who the user may or should know lesswell as likely intended targets. Similarly, a telephone whobot might gobeyond simple caller ID/name information that is in one-to-onecorrespondence to the calling phone, to suggest other people who mightbe using that phone, based on relationships, schedules, location data,and the like.

Additional Aspects Relating to Advertising and Commerce and Third-PartyLinking Rights

It is also noted, given the capabilities of independently-sourced,alternative, third-party links as described herein, that enhancementsassociated with ads viewed on TV could potentially enable a new form ofcommerce that changes the coupling between advertisements and theconsumer actions that result from them. This could allow a portal toprovide for enhancements and/or t-commerce sales offered by partiesunrelated to those distributing the ad. Barring any legal impediment tosuch indirect exploitation of synchronicity, such t-commerce revenuesmight be a significant factor in making such coordination portalservices profitable.

Considering further how new forms of commerce might be enabled by thisflexible coupling of ads and independently sourced third-partyenhancements, it is useful to consider the relationships between threekinds of parties: the producers of goods or services that are thesubject of the ad (“producer”), the creators and distributors of the ad(“advertiser”), and the sellers of the goods or services that benefitfrom consumer action triggered by the ad (“seller”). In traditionalretail, ads are typically controlled by producers, and lead to anyseller chosen by the viewer. In traditional direct marketing, theadvertiser and seller are one and the same, and may be independent ofthe producer. Sellers may also fund advertising that directs customersto that seller even in situations where that is not directly actionable,such as in the case of TV ads for retailers. Hybrid cases may alsooccur, such as auto ads funded cooperatively by manufacturers and localdealers. The third-party ad linking capability adds a way for a sellerto funnel the consumer action resulting from the ad to feed directlyinto its sales process, and to potentially do this without anycooperation by the advertiser, through use of the third-party linkmechanism.

For example, once a portal determined what channel a viewer waswatching, by direct or indirect methods such as those described above,it might then determine what ads would be presented to the user. Evenwhere ads are individually addressed, informed predictions could bepractical even in cases where direct coordination methods describedherein were not available. Thus the portal service can effectivelycapture all such ads and offer enhancement resources that exploit the adto provide information and a place to buy the product or service.

In most current situations, ads that are not specifically targeted toparticular sellers are funded by producers, who obtain revenue fromsellers as part of the wholesale cost of the goods. A new model ofindependent advertising that differs from this might be enabled by themethods described. This might occur if it is determined that theadvertiser has rights relating to third-party enhancements linked to hisads that are used for selling, based on copyright (or “adrights”), orcan in some other way oblige such sellers to pay fees relating the salesderived from their ad. If the advertiser can enforce such rights inorder to obtain fees from the sellers, it can fund the ad from thosefees, independently of the producer.

This model could then work in a way that might be viewed as being likean affiliate sales model in reverse. Conventional affiliate sales modelsare operated by single sellers, such as AMAZON.COM, who offeradvertiser-affiliate relationships to many Web sites that act as directmarketing advertisers, and who are paid referral fees for any sales theyrefer to the seller, as tracked by means of specially coded links. Thusthe relationship could be that of possibly many advertisers to a singleseller who operates the advertiser-affiliate program. In the new modelenabled by the methods described herein, the relationship is that ofpossibly many sellers to a single advertiser who operates this newseller-affiliate program. Instead of the advertiser controlling links tothe seller, and competing with other such advertisers, it is theindependent seller controlling third-party links from the advertiser,and competing with other such sellers for the preferential use of theirlinks by consumers. Such sellers could effectively provide linkbaseservices that viewers might select from and use. Such linkbase servicesmight be obtained either directly or through broker services, whether byactive request and selection, or by implicit association with someprogram or Web service, or other facility used by the viewer, includinga portal service as described herein.

This might enable an open market for advertisers, in which anyindependent advertising creator/distributor can pick among products andproducers, fund an ad on its own, and profit from the sales it generatesthrough third-party sellers. Thus instead of advertising being a servicebusiness that is indirectly funded as a cost of sales through eitherproducers or sellers, at rates which generally do not correspond toresults in any direct way, it becomes a direct profit center, withdirect revenue from the sales that it drives. This could enable newlevels of entrepreneurship, results-orientation, efficiency, and profitin the advertising business. Thus any advertiser might be able topromote any product or service, and any seller might be able to exploitany advertisement or promotion, perhaps in accordance with basic minimalbusiness qualifications.

An independent advertiser wishing to employ this model might act toidentify and/or quantify such sales, and/or to collect from the sellers.This might be done by use of various methods to search out and identifythird-party links that use the ad as their starting resource. One methodfor identifying sellers could be to use bots that simulate viewers, sothat those bots request third-party seller links from each identifiableseller for each ad of interest to determine what links are offered. Thiscould be done by advertisers, or by a clearinghouse service analogous tocopyright clearinghouses. Once the fact of such links by a seller for anad is established, administrative processes can be applied to accomplishthe remaining quantification, audit, and collection tasks. Such botscould be applied to all sellers that might be identified by searchingand tracking all methods that are used by such sellers to attractviewers to use their services.

Similar issues of tracking independently sourced third-party links mightapply to copyright aspects of third-party linking, as described above.The method of using bots to locate such links just described, might beuseful for such tracking of copyright usage as well.

For all such tracking and auditing tasks, alternative methods might bebased on requiring that browsers provide “click-from” data to the ownerof the starting resource and/or to some clearinghouse service.Currently, Web servers that provide ending resources commonly collectclick data, and servers that provide Web pages with embedded outboundlinks can use various techniques such as redirects to captureinformation on clicks from those pages. Such data might also beobtainable independently from browsers or browser add-ons that collectsuch data and report it, whether in real time or in periodic batches.While use of third-party links is not yet common, a browser thatsupports them might readily report on their usage in the same way. Inthe case of independently sourced third-party links, however, the ownerof the starting resource might not be able to cause redirects. Also, theuse of browser-based reporting is currently limited, and the user mighttypically control whether such features are used.

Thus it might be desirable to provide a browser-based tracking andauditing capability that would be reliably applied to all links thatmight use a given resource as a starting resource without dependence onthe cooperation of the user. This might be done by ensuring that onlybrowsers that include such functions can be used to work with theresources that are to be controlled. One way to accomplish this might bethrough the use of proprietary and/or closed protocols and/or resourcecoding or encryption formats that could be restricted to use withcompliant browsers.

Such might be in the form of special add-on viewer software that is usedwith a standard browser. Business practices and copyright controls mightbe more or less effective in limiting the use of non-compliant browsers.More complete assurance of the integrity of such practices might beachieved by using methods for verifying the identity and integrity ofsystems, commonly described as trusted systems, in conjunction with DRMsystems that might require such tracking and auditing to be invoked forspecified resources. For example, the methods proposed by the TrustedComputing Platform Alliance (TCPA), or similar methods proposed byMicrosoft for its Palladium software, might be used to ensure that aresource can only be viewed in a trusted environment and that a viewingsystem that provided for a trusted implementation of such tracking andauditing functions must be used. It will be understood that depending onthe particular software environment, various alternatives might beapplied to the packaging of such functions, such as, for example, basicidentity and trust support in the trust system, setup of link trackingand audit in the DRM system, and actual tracking and reporting of linkactivation activity in the browser system.

With such methods it might be practical to ensure to an adequate levelthat all independently sourced third party links can be tracked andaudited, and thus to enable effective assessment of fees relating to theuse of such links. This might support the business methods justdescribed, whether with regard to licensing of content linking rights,or with regard to compensation for advertising link value, as well as toother similar new business methods. Depending on the particulars of suchbusiness methods, such fees might be assessed to the provider of thethird-party links, and/or to the provider of the ending resource of thelinks, and/or to the viewer, or to any combination thereof. Fees mightalso pertain to the act of offering of such a link to the user, even ifthe link is not actually traversed by the user, and in such case thetracking might be extended to the mere presentation of such links.

Other new aspects of advertising and commerce could also be enabled bythe methods described herein. As background to this, advertising andcommerce offer presentation might be viewed at two levels:

-   -   One is in the form of linked enhancements or enhancement        channels, in which an ad or commerce offer is presented as an        ending resource linked from a base program as a starting        resource, such as in the case of enhancements to TV or video        ads, or other kinds of linked content. Such linkage may be        between similar or dissimilar media types. Much of the        discussion of advertising herein relates to such linked offers,        with the media types being a combination of TV and Web-like        resources. Two sub-cases are the one in which the starting        resource is itself an ad, and the one in which the starting        resource is a non-advertising content resource.    -   Another is simple placement of ad or commerce offers embedded in        or adjacent to a content resource (in space and/or time),        commonly, but not necessarily, of a similar media type. Such        embedded ads might include traditional Web page banners or other        current and future forms of Web page-related advertising, and        follows the model of other media, including conventional TV, in        which the ad is simply adjacent to a content resource.    -   Another is a compound form in which simple embedded ads might be        directly associated with a resource that itself is a linked        enhancement to another resource. As described further below with        regard to the example of FIG. 9, such an embedded ad might be        placed within or adjacent to any specific enhancement page. Such        an embedded ad might also usefully be placed with an enhancement        viewing control panel, such as for a portal service or        equivalent local control center function. Again, sub-cases        relate to whether the base resource is itself an ad or not.

While the discussion herein is in terms of simple cases in whichadvertising and non-advertising content are distinct, it will beunderstood that most or all of these methods and variations are equallyapplicable to hybrid cases in which the distinction is blurred, withouta clear boundary between an advertising segment and a non-advertisingsegment. Such cases might include, for example, cases of sponsorship andof product placement, in which commercial messages and images might beintegrated into a program. In such cases, link starting resources mightbe defined with regard to such fine-grained elements as a time segment,an image region, and/or an object, for example.

These cases of advertising and commerce tied to linked enhancementsenable a new richness in placing offers and in relating them to aviewer's activity context, drawing on available knowledge ofsynchronicity. In addition to general knowledge of the viewer, and/or ofany resource and ad is adjacent to, this linkage and synchronicityenables exploitation of knowledge of a program, such as a TV program,being viewed by the viewer at a given time:

-   -   In the case that the base resource is an ad, these methods might        allow enhancements, or ads adjacent to enhancements (or related        control centers) to be used for offers related to the subject of        the base ad. One application of this is the open market        advertising model described above.    -   In the case that the base resource is a non-advertising content        program, these methods might allow enhancements or ads adjacent        to enhancements (or related control centers) to be related to        the subject of the base content program. Applications of the        latter might be to enable various enhanced forms of advertising        or commerce to obtain revenue support for a portal service and        to provide new commerce-related services to viewers.

This combination of enhancements to base programs, for either or both ofcontent programs and advertising programs, with embedded ads in thoseenhancement resources enables a new richness in advertising and commercerelating to TV and other video. With regard to the case of the baseprogram being a non-advertising content program, marketers might takefull advantage of knowledge of the base program to define offers thatrelate to specific aspects of the program, such as for example, people,places, plot, subject matter, actors, music, product placements, and/orreferences, as well as relationships to broader aspects of the theme ormood of the program. Unlike simple adjacency-based ads related to adiscrete media resource, enhancements linked to continuous media add alevel of richness and of variation over time. Such thematic basis foroffers might, for example be used in the simple example of book offers,in which books that related to any of the themes of the program might beoffered. This could extend similarly to other products or merchandise,such as music, video, travel, and more loosely to any kind of product orservice that might be sold by exploiting an association or commonelement with the base program, or inferences about the viewers who mightbe watching that base program.

Such offers might be placed in or adjacent to enhancement pages relatedthose programs, in special ECs dedicated to such offers, and in oradjacent to the control center screens. Since control center screensmight be most often visible, that positioning might be of particularvalue. Thus the use of such new forms of advertising might be a majorrevenue source for such a portal or portal-like service.

As further development of the portal business model, a multiplicity ofdistinct revenue streams might be enabled, separately or in combination,notably including:

-   -   Subscriber fees for access to some or all of the portal        services, possibly with some services provided at no charge, and        other premium services charged based on usage or subscription,        or various similar schemes.    -   Advertiser fees and/or commerce revenues for offers placed        through the portal service, as just described.    -   Carriage fees for provision of enhancements to viewers, as noted        previously. EC providers might be willing to pay carriage fees        to gain viewership, and might fund such fees out of subscription        or usage fees, and/or advertising or commerce offers that they        manage themselves, or might subsidize them for reasons of        promotion of other business, activities, or advocacy of points        of view that such carriage supports. It will be understood that        such fees might involve not only the simple service of carriage        as transport, but also the service of the portal as a demand and        viewership aggregator that might help the EC provider find an        audience. Such a business model might become particularly        relevant in the case of a portal that supports multiple ECs, in        which each EC might compete for an audience, and the portal        serves as the marketplace that puts a large population of        viewers within easy reach.    -   Market data fees for sale of data relating to viewer usage        patterns, including ratings data for viewing of TV as a primary        program, and clickstream data for enhancements, such as via the        Web, as described further below.

These interrelated classes of revenue could be viewed as deriving fromthe role of such a portal as a marketplace that brings together viewers,content providers, and advertising/commerce participants in a mutuallybeneficial and self-reinforcing market ecology. As noted, such aportal-based market ecology could operate independently of the baseprogram content production and delivery business that it build on.Multiple portals might then compete on their ability to aggregateviewers and EC providers, as well as advertisers or other commerceoperations, and might achieve economies of scale and scope based ontheir success in doing that.

Expanding on the rich variety enabled by this model, it is noted thatcontent and services of such a portal might include content obtainedfrom independent sources, content created by the portal operator, andcontent created by portal users, members, and/or subscribers. Based onthe teachings herein of open access to enhancement channels, and theiraggregation, it might be expected that other members might valueuser-generated enhancement content. Such user-generated content mightgenerally be available to all users, but it might also be made possibleto restrict such content to closed groups of users, such as for examplefamily members, buddy-list members, and the like. Similarly, suchcontent might or might not be limited to, or preferentially accessibleto, users of the portal in which they were created.

Such user-generated enhancement content might relate to widely publishedor broadcast base programs, such as TV programs or movies, or mightrelate to user created base programs, such as home movies or videos.This might be done using a variety of automated and manual aids, asdescribed elsewhere herein. It is also noted that the line between suchforms of content might blur, as video (and audio) editing toolsfacilitate creation of rich hybrids of published and user-generatedcontent, and as portal services allow for wide distribution ofuser-created content. Examples are clips, re-edits, montages, andcompilations. With the broad proliferation of personal video editingtools, these practices might develop much like sampling and DJcompilations in music. In the case of widely viewed base programs,individuals and/or businesses might take on the role of independentcommentators or guides, and in the case of wide broadcast in real time,might create their enhancement channel content in corresponding realtime. Thus, examples of the range of possible providers of ETV/ITVsupplementary content include:

-   -   Program providers/producers—the core creatives, with the ability        to shape the primary content    -   Networks and cable channels—a distinct team that may team with        the program provider, but may not.    -   Local broadcasters—cooperative with the networks, but with        complementary local orientation.    -   Cable/Satellite operators—an end distribution service that might        have less tie to the creation, but might be closer to the users        and the community, and that would typically have special access        to the STB.    -   Advertisers and agencies—the core creatives for the ads, who        might highly value use of an interactive channel for that and        might prefer to control it, and might be desirous of a broader        role in some programming.    -   Sponsors (and agencies)—more deeply connected than simple        advertisers, and with an interest in presenting enhancements to        a program that play up their special focus, and presenting an        opportunity for the program providers to do sponsor-specific        versions under a custom publishing model.    -   Alternative voices—less privileged in access to creation of the        base content and distribution channel, but able to offer unique        perspectives to select audiences. These might include major        independent provider/producers of a stature comparable to the        primary program provider/producers, as well as a more varied and        open ended set of fan-zines, enthusiasts, counterculture,        parody, education, etc. Such independent providers might be        particularly able to innovate breakthrough ideas in creative        content interactivity and in media technology.    -   End-users/viewers—desirous of using this new medium for rich        forms of direct communication, whether one-to-one, or in groups.

Such an increase in variety and richness of sourcing roles might gohand-in-hand with a corresponding increase in variety and richness indistribution roles, as complex, Web-style distribution methods such assyndication, superdistribution, viral distribution, peer-to-peersharing, and the like are applied at any or all of the many stages ofcontent creation; editing, and enhancement, and involving anyparticipants, such as those just listed. Similarly, the base programsmight also involve rich combinations of commercially-provided content,viewer-provided content, and mixtures and/or edits thereof, and might bedistributed through a similarly rich combination of channels.

It will be understood that while discussion herein refers variously toopen content, open linkbases, open enhancement channels, and relatedaspects of open inclusion of content and metadata provided by individualusers and/or subscribers of browsing and portal services, and byindependent content and linkbase provider businesses and relatedservices, practical considerations may impose some limits on suchopenness. For example, it might be desirable to exclude items based onattributes of the item, or of the provider of the item, such as relatingto abuses of legal and/or community standards of integrity, honesty,civility, propriety, obscenity, responsibility or other similar basicstandards. Limitations might also apply to age, or to basic levels ofqualification It will be understood that in practice openness ofparticipation might not be absolute, even if relatively liberal andnon-discriminatory standards are applied, and the term “substantiallyopen” is used herein to indicate this more precisely, including forexample cases of minimal requirements such as membership, registration,and/or subscription, and/or basic requirements of age and/orqualification. Unless otherwise indicated or clear from context,references herein to openness to individuals, subscribers, contentproviders, service providers, and the like will be understood to referto substantial openness that need not be absolute.

It is also noted that rich variations in business models might resultfrom the interplay of these many sources of supply and demand for thesemany varieties of content, all connected by portal services, asdescribed herein. Given this rich and dynamic interplay of supply anddemand, it should be understood that the direction of revenue flowsmight vary for any or all of the flows described here. Similarly,alternative business structures relating to which entities benefitedfrom revenue generating functions such as advertising/commerce, andwhich entities incurred related costs might also bear on the directionand amount of revenues.

Such can relate to any and all of the revenue/cost streams relating toprovision of such services, among any and all of the various playerswithin the industry that combine to provide them, including advertising,commerce, programming of base and/or enhancement content and/orlinkbases, distribution system operations carriage, customer service,program guides, middleware, ad serving, consumer electronics andcomputer equipment, user subscriptions or usage fees, and the like.Accordingly, it is noted that:

-   -   EC providers might pay carriage fees for distribution of their        EC links and/or content, but under different conditions of        supply and demand, such as high value and demand, they might        demand license fees for that instead.    -   Similarly, user-generated content might be contributed without        fee to the portal, or even with paid carriage, possibly        indirectly in the form of service usage fees incurred to the        user in posting such content. In such case, the portal might        thus obtain revenue both for the creation and distribution of        such content, from both the content provider and the content        consumer.    -   Conversely, in other situations, such content might be given        higher value, and thus generate payments to the user/provider,        and such payments might be directly or indirectly related to        popularity and/or fees obtained by the portal for that content,        possibly including indirect revenue, such as from advertising.        Thus, for example, users who are fans of a program might be        enabled to develop enhancement content for a given program, and        to self-publish for distribution through the portal, and to        obtain revenue for that.    -   Similarly, the boundaries between pure content programming,        sponsored programming, and advertisements might vary over a        continuum, so that the question of carriage versus license and        the amount of such fees might depend on which parties benefit        from related payment streams, such as subscription, sponsorship,        and/or commerce that are realized external to the portal.    -   Subscription fees might be charged to users, but again,        advertising and commerce might involve direct or indirect        payments to users in any of various forms.    -   It is further noted that multiple such portal services might be        linked to one another, such as in syndication structures, to add        a yet further dimension of flow of content and payments. It is        further noted, as mentioned before, that the kind of portal        service described herein might integrate with other content        portals, including conventional Web portals, and new forms of        video oriented portals, and that revenue streams for such added        services might also be relevant, and that these too could        involve multiple parties and flow in any direction.    -   Similarly, while much of the discussion herein of portals driven        by cable or satellite head-end operators described models in        which the portal might be operated as adjuncts of those services        and/or on their behalf, where those operators might benefit        directly from the various MMUI/portal related revenue streams,        it is noted that alternative models might operate such portals        as independent businesses. In such cases relationships with such        operators might not exist, or might relate only to state relay        activities. Again, revenue flows relating to such state relay        might go in either direction, with payments to operators for        carriage of state records and/or triggers to the portal, for        example to the extent that such carriage was valuable in        enabling the portal to obtain revenue, or payments from        operators to portals for provision of associated MMUI        coordination services, for example to the extent that        cooperation in enabling such services was valuable to the        operator.    -   The same might apply to liberator devices or other adapter        hardware or software, which might for example be bundled with        services, provided to consumers for a fee, or be given to        consumers at no charge or with cash and/or non-cash incentives.

Given the variability in the direction and nature of these flows, due tovariations in such factors as business models and market conditions asdescribed in these and other similar variations, it should be understoodthat, unless indicated otherwise or clear from context, referencesherein to license fees and/or carriage fees, as well as similar termsfor costs and/or fees, are meant to be inclusive of converse cases ofnegative or reverse fees as well. Additionally, reference to licenseand/or carriage is also meant to be inclusive of fees that may notstrictly involve license and/or carriage, but that have similarcharacteristics, such as, for example, sourcing fees, and/ordistribution fees, respectively.

It is also noted that various community communications services can alsobe portal business model aspects. Such community communications servicescould include, for example, chat, IM, bulletin boards, Weblogs, and/orother real-time or asynchronous communications among viewers, along withrelated presence awareness and contact/relationship management services.As noted above, MMUI features are particularly relevant to use of suchcommunications in conjunction with TV/video viewing. The value ofcommunity services might be especially true for realtime broadcast, butmight apply to asynchronous viewing as well. As part of a portalstrategy for aggregating viewers and services as a marketplace that addsvalue by linking them, the use of community/communications services tolink viewers in communications related to their viewing might beapplicable.

Such could relate to known communities and/or to the power of thenetworking service to create new communities as needed. Viewers could beexpected to seek out portal services that offer desirable communitiesthat serve social and/or collaborative needs, and once a part of such acommunity might be reluctant to leave it. They might also seek portalsthat effectively introduce them to individuals or existing communitiesthat serve their new needs as they arise. Because such communities, andpools of users that can be selected from to create potential newcommunities, are essentially unique, this might serve as a unique,persistent, and relatively sustainable advantage to a service that canbuild strong membership and communities that might create switchingcosts, one that might last after other differentiators might becomecommoditized. The linkage to TV viewing could present a basis fororganizing and building communities, for example, because people like tointeract with people who share their interests, especially when thatconnection is made in real time for current activities.

Another portal service might be to assist users in finding fellow userswho are watching the same program at a given time—and to factor thatcriterion in with other selection criteria—and then to maintainrelationships with such users. The association of video programs,including movies, with communities might offer a very powerful socialservice, including, for example, such features as:

-   -   Supporting creation and operation of self-organizing and        self-selecting groups, such as movie clubs or sports clubs, that        share interest in a more or less narrowly constrained class of        programs and wish to gather and communicate in any of various        ways, whether in real or virtual form.    -   Supporting matching services that are based, at least in part,        on identification of common interest and/or actual real time        synchronicity in viewing of specific programs or groups of        programs.    -   Combining community groups and matching services, such as to        select among the full set of synchronous viewers of a program,        as one level of screening, by application of additional        screening criteria to find small subsets or individuals having        particular mutual interest. Such additional criteria might        include explicitly stated matching criteria and/or implicitly        stated criteria, such as automated content-based associations.    -   Such services might be used in conjunction with other methods,        such as for example to flag individuals on a buddy list that        were watching the same program.    -   Options might be provided to control the scope of synchronicity        matching, such as nationally, regionally, and/or within a given        distribution system or locale, or based on synchronicity at a        given time, and/or over a range of times or showings/episodes.

The common bond of such synchronicity might be especially strong whenactive, but might carry over into enduring common interests as well.Thus, such services based on synchronicity in viewing continuous mediamight provide a highly dynamic and richly selective catalyst for socialorganization, especially when used in conjunction with conventionalmethods for organization and selection in virtual communities.

The establishment of strong communities might enable a portal to obtainpremium subscription revenue from viewers, and to leverage that toobtain premium rates from other portal participants, including contentproviders and advertisers/commerce partners. Similarly, all contentcreated by viewers, whether as free-standing content, or ascommunications to other viewers, could enter the pool of resources thatmight then be subject to association with media programs, so thatmember-created content might become a significant and valuable componentof the content resources addressed by such a portal service, and again,one that might be unique, or at least preferentially accessible, to agiven portal.

All of the features and methods described herein for associatingenhancements with programs could be fully applicable to associatingcommunities and sub-communities—and their related communications contentand media—with program viewing, as being just another kind of resource.This could include doing so as an ending resource associated with baseprograms, and/or as a starting resource for other content and services,such as for content or services associated with or aimed at communitiesand their communications processes. Again, as noted above, this alsoapplies to any other kinds of services and/or tools, since all of thesemight be treated as just another kind of resource by these methods.

With regard to the collection and sale of market data, the methodsdescribed herein for coordination of MMUI services might enable data onthe viewing of TV programs to be obtained as a byproduct, and, perhapsbecause of those economies, allow for collection on a far broader scalethan has been practical. Such data might be of high commercial value.Currently, specialized vendors such as NIELSEN collect and sell TVratings data that is obtained using relatively small numbers ofinstrumented sample households that enter data using manual diary logs,in conjunction with “people meters” that are relatively expensive, andbecause of the small sample sizes, need to be very carefully controlledfor statistical validity.

As a byproduct of the methods described herein, data on a currentlyactive channel could be available for large numbers of households,perhaps either already present at a common portal service or readilycollectable from a portal-like local MMUI browsing facility. While suchdata might not be statistically controlled in the same manner as currentratings samples, in which samples are chosen to be statistically validrepresentatives of a larger population, a variety of techniques could beapplied to enhancing the value of such data:

-   -   Associated data on enhancement clickstreams might be useful in        itself, as a measure of program involvement, as well as of        success of commerce offers and services    -   Such data might be useful also to weight observed viewing        ratings data relating to primary TV programs, based on the level        and nature of the viewer's enhancement-related activity. For        example, total lack of enhancement activity might suggest the TV        was on, but not being viewed. Conversely, very high levels of        some kinds of Web activity might suggest the viewer was        distracted from the program. Rich varieties of        attention-weighted ratings data might be derived from such data        using a range of methods that will be apparent to one skilled in        the art.    -   Semi-automated synchronization actions or other context        awareness methods used to support the MMUI service might        similarly be tracked and used to determine whether a viewer was        actually present.    -   Other rich data from Web or other enhancement related activity        might be made available as clickstreams or the like, and might        be usable in correlation with primary program ratings. This        associated coactivity data might become a highly valuable new        form of market data, one that can be used to derive deep insight        into viewer behavior.

Thus while this data might not be inherently controlled in the same waythat current ratings data is statistically controlled and subjected torigorous built-in quality controls and validation steps, some similaradjustments might be made after collection and during processing. Forexample, the very large sample sizes that might become practical might,in of itself, reduce the level to which statistical errors such asself-selection and demographic skew may occur, and the associatedMMUI-related data might be used to adjust for such errors, as justdescribed. Further, even if this data is not made fully adequate as asubstitute for conventional ratings data, it might be a valuablecomplement to it. Thus, the two methods might be used in combination,with the expensive, statistically controlled ratings data used tocalibrate and adjust the more widely collected, but more possibly flaweddata collected in this new way. At the same time, the more widelycollected data might be more sensitive for spotting emerging patterns ortrends, and for rating programs that lack mass appeal, which mightbecome increasingly important in a many-channel and/or VOD environment.

Because such data is collected as a byproduct of providing desiredbrowsing services, and in a non-intrusive manner, many consumers mightbe willing to accept some level of data use, and some attendant loss ofprivacy, depending on how the use of the data was controlled, and onwhat incentives might be provided for permitting data collection. Itwill be further understood that as TV viewing systems gain intelligence,widespread data collection might become more economical even apart fromthe MMUI and portals facilities described herein, and that some of themethods just described for using such data in conjunction withcoactivity data from the Web or other sources, even if not directlycoordinated, might still be useful, both to adjust, and to expand onsuch simple viewing data.

Another broad aspect of these methods to be noted is that just asconventional Web portals are closely related in function to searchengines, the methods of providing an enhancement portal described hereinmight also be thought of as providing a new kind of search engine. Thiskind of portal that takes TV programs, or other similar media, asstarting resources can be thought of as a “what I am watching on TV now”portal, one that can, for example, give a corresponding view of the Webkeyed to that starting resource as a search entry. For instance, byapplying the methods described herein to provide automatic associationto a more or less open and full set of Web resources, the result couldessentially be one of a specialized search engine keyed to “what I amwatching on TV now.” It will be understood that while such searchingmight in some embodiments be based on explicit viewer entry of thesearch context, according to various embodiments described herein suchviewing contexts can be determined and applied automatically.

It will be further understood that these new methods might, in variousembodiments, be combined with any existing or future methods ordinarilyused for conventional search tasks. For example, users might be providedwith a search entry form in which a search query text string may beentered just as with ordinary search services. In this enhanced service,the search might be performed in part as an ordinary search, but withthe added feature of using the program viewing context as an additionalfactor in the selection and/or ranking of search results. A feature ofthis service is that, using the methods described herein, the user neednot explicitly provide identification and/or other reference to theviewed resource that is to be used as a search context. In one suchembodiment, the determined identity of the TV program or othercontinuous media resource being viewed might be used to derive anadditional search term to be logically anded with the user-enteredsearch terms to exclude non-corresponding results, and in otherembodiments that identity might be used as a weighting factor that wouldraise the ranking of corresponding results, or to drive some other moreadvanced functional relationship.

Thus, as a example, a search for “Sydney Greenstreet” entered during aviewing of the movie Casablanca might return as results those resourceswith content related to that actor that make specific reference to thatfilm, without need for the viewer to enter the film title or otheridentifier, or even to know the title/identifier. A wide variety of waysto integrate such viewing context-specific searches with more generalsearch services will be apparent. One example might be to provide asearch entry box along with a radio button control that indicateswhether viewing context is to be included as a factor in the search.Another specific example is to make all searches in designated entryboxes be program-context-dependent as a default.

It will further be apparent that such program-context-related searchesmight, for example, be based on simple associations with the programtitle and/or identifier code, and/or some other specificidentity—whether those associations are pre-defined or dynamicallyassociated with target resources. As another example, such searchesmight be based on more indirect and/or advanced methods of associatingterms and/or concepts with the content and/or metadata of such viewedresources, and then using those terms and/or concepts as components ofthe search query. Such methods might, for example, apply imagerecognition to derive a search term. For instance, such methods mightderive “DC-3” as a search term if the user entered “airplane” whilewatching the end of Casablanca. As another example, such methods mightuse text-based inference, such as drawing on reviews and/or otherdescriptions of a film, to determine results for a search of a specifiedterm. For instance, such methods might use such text-based inference todetermine that results of a search of “tank” while watching “SavingPrivate Ryan” should rank results for World War II era tanks higher thanthose of other eras, whether by using “World War II” as a search term,or by more advanced inference methods.

These new kinds of viewing-context-related portal/search services, inturn, could enable further business models and revenue-generationmethods that draw on the model of conventional search engines. Suchcould, for instance, involve building on the core economics of 1)aggregating viewers by offering useful services and/or 2) monetizingsuch access to viewers by channeling it to serve aggregations of otherplayers, such as information, product and/or service providers who wishto make offerings to those viewers, and/or who will pay theportal/search engine operator for referrals and/or for preferentialposition in presentations to viewers who are associated by either anexpressed or implied relevance. The association could be one thatrelates to what viewers were presently watching, perhaps including anycombination of specific program, time-position, category/genre, channel,and/or the like. In the various embodiments, such associations might,for example, relate to either or both of the viewing context and anysearch queries or other transaction requests that might be explicitlystated. It will be understood that the provision of relevant materialthat is enhanced by such methods might, for instance not only add valueto the viewer, but also make the associated offer more likely to benoted and/or acted upon, thus potentially adding value to the offeringparty, and thus potentially benefiting the portal/search engine operatoras facilitator to both parties. In various embodiments, the value mightbe extracted in the form of fees, in forms such as described hereinand/or in other forms that will be apparent to one skilled in the art.Differentiating and value generating features of such a service to usersmight then include, for example, levels of relevance, recall andprecision, ease of linking and use, richness of offerings andincentives, and/or the like. It is further noted that differentiatingand value generating features of such a service to EC providers mightinclude, for example, such factors as the number and value of viewersand/or the effectiveness of the processes of matching and/or delivery ofthose viewers to appropriate ECs.

In further considering the value of personalized EPG functions insupport of business models for enhancement portal services, it is notedthat it might be desirable to charge premium fees for powerfulpersonalization features, but that this might conflict with the desireto achieve maximum numbers of users, especially in early growth stages.One method that might be used to differentiate levels of service relatesto the display of filtered and ranked program listings. Personalized EPGfunctions could, for instance, present only the programs expected to bedesired by the user, perhaps in order of desirability, instead of anon-personalized, unfiltered mass of listings, whether organized in agrid, or in other listing structures, such as by genre or person.

It is noted that, in various embodiments, it might be desirable to givenon-paying users some, but not all, of the benefits of suchfiltering/ranking. One way this might be done is to provide all userswith the tools to setup custom filtering/ranking services, but to limitthe power of the tools they can use to display the results. For example,instead of allowing presentation of a filtered/ranked list that showsonly the desired items, in order, indications of selection and rankmight be provided in a more limited manner, such as in the form of codesin a standard list. Thus, as a specific example, if a service were tosegment programs into categories or genres A, B, C, and so forth, and toorder the selections by predicted preference rank, 1, 2, 3, . . . , thisinformation could be provided in a limited way by simply coding theentries in the unfiltered/unranked list as follows:

Basic, coded display: Premium display: Prog1 A: Prog6 Prog2 *A3 Prog10Prog3 Prog6 Prog4 *B1 Prog5 B: Prog4 Prog6 *A1 Prog7 . . .

Such a basic, coded display could act to demonstrate the workings of thefiltering/ranking processes in a way that was useful, and/or whichpermitted appreciation of the effectiveness of the process in allaspects other than display, but with a utility that was less than thatof a display format that did some or all of showing items in rank order,perhaps additionally excluding items of low rank and/or organizing itemsby category/genre. The above exemplary “Premium display” depicts suchadditional functionality.

By extending certain benefits (e.g., a basic service) to non-payingusers, large numbers of users might be enticed to make use of thosebenefits, and to see and obtain much of the value of customization,while a significant portion of those users might sooner or later beinduced to pay for a premium display service. In one embodiment, usersmight be given a free trial of a premium service, and revert to a basicservice (e.g., that includes filtering/ranking functions but lacks theenhanced display features) if renewal for fee does not occur. It willfurther be understood that this method of differentiating service bypresenting category and/or rank codings while limiting the power of theinformation display format might be applicable to any service thatinvolved categorization, filtering, and/or ranking.

Finally, it is re-emphasized that with regard to all of the services andrevenues addressed herein, the ability of a portal to support MMUIcapabilities might be essential, or at least important, in enablingthese services to be effective, and thus in enabling related revenues tobe obtained.

Further Aspects of Multi-Channel MMUI Services

Additional detail of possible embodiments relating to portal basedservices, including those based on standing sessions, and cases thatprovide for multiple or alternative enhancement channels will now beprovided. It will be understood that similar methods can be appliedwithout a separate remote Web portal, such as by using localclient-based functions instead, or in some distributed combination ofthe two.

As noted above, the effect of such a portal might be to provideenhancement services that potentially operate across all channels andprogramming supported by a cable operator or other distributor, as wellas possibly other programming, including cases of multiple distributionservices, and that might be provided on a continuing basis. Such aservice might exploit a mixture of portal-wide resources andprogram-specific enhancements and other Web services, where some or allof the portal-wide pages and triggers provide control center functionsfor the user. Thus if, for example, enhancements were controlled usingATVEF triggers, it might be desirable to use a mixture of cross-programportal-level triggers and channel/program-specific triggers. This mightbe effected using portal-level pages containing ATVEF receiver objectsfor the corresponding portal-level triggers, in combination withspecific program-level pages containing receiver objects for thecorresponding program-level triggers. Depending upon the details of theimplementation, a filtering and routing function might be provided atthe PC, such as in an applet or browser accessory, to route suchtriggers to the appropriate pages and the corresponding receiverobjects, and to load any pages that might not already be loaded. It willbe apparent that similar methods can be applied to other triggering orlinkbase delivery methods.

It is further rioted that such a cross-program portal service that mightbe operated by a distributor or other party might intermix enhancementresources provided by the portal operator, the programmer of the baseprogram, or other parties. It will be understood that a variety of Webtechnologies might be used to enables Web pages to be composed ofelements obtained from multiple sources and multiple servers, such as bycomposition at the server, framing (including iframe or ilayer coding orsimilar variations), by server or client-side include functions, use ofWeb services based on SOAP, and various other methods. Thus very richand flexible combinations of sourcing can be achieved.

The use of such methods might be controlled by a multi-channel portaloperator, but might presumably be based on negotiated agreement withprogrammers and other parties. Depending on such arrangements, someprogram-specific enhancements might be provided by some mixture of theportal operator, the programmer, and/or other parties, and/or provisionof such program-specific enhancements might be restricted to thosecontrolled by the programmer. A viewer might also be able to chose amongalternative enhancement channels, such as with ongoing preferencesand/or settings, and/or link navigation controls, thus effectivelypersonalizing the portal.

Turning now to FIG. 9, therein is a schematic portraying exemplaryfurther detail of a user interface for such a cross-program portal. Thisexample is one in which enhancements are routinely presented on the PCscreen, possibly in the mode of a standing session, and expands onlayouts of the sort depicted in FIG. 3 for the PC, to depict possibleuser interfaces that might support multiple linkbase channels (LCs) orenhancement channels (ECs) applying to each of multiple primary programchannels. Shown in FIG. 9 is a PC ITV window 330 that is presentable toa user. Window 330 could be implemented, for example, as a standardbrowser screen that includes a browsing/navigation control panel area920 that is located to the left of the interactive content area 334, andwhich might be an alternative to other control panel uses that aretypical of browsers such as for display of history or favorites orsearching. Enhancement resources could be presented in interactivecontent area 334. Interactive content area 334 might be one of multiplesuch windows that might be stacked, with each presented in a separatebrowser window, and with each selectable from the taskbar 338 in theusual fashion.

Also depicted in FIG. 9 as the current top window is an optionalcomposite window format that could be used to present compact resources(e.g., menu pages and limited content areas) such that multiple frames930 might be presented. Such presentation might, for instance be in thepaned format depicted, whereby concurrent viewing of multipleenhancements could be facilitated. Further shown in the exemplaryembodiment of FIG. 9 are two separate enhancement channels for each ofthe primary program and one ad on some channel A. It will be understoodthat similar composite pages might be provided for individual programsas well.

Control panel 920, which might also be thought of as a dashboard, maytake any desired format, with the example here showing a hierarchicaltree control for selecting among a set of enhancement resources, in thiscase using the common convention of a “+” at the left of a group itemindicating that there are multiple items that can be revealed in anexpanded view, by clicking the + sign, and a “−” that can be clicked tohide such a sub-item list. Alternatives might use buttons, icons, orimages, or other indication and selection methods. The list of resourcesmight be restricted to currently open windows or might include links toadditional resources. For example, visual distinctions such as color orfont style might indicate whether recently viewed resource windows arecurrently active. Thus, the user might use either the taskbar buttons orthe control panel entries to select among open resource windows.

As depicted in control panel 920, a user might select from the compositemultipane page, and from pages for each of two TV program channels, withentries for the primary program and for each of multiple ads. Suchmethods of maintaining and controlling multiple windows might enablepowerful and flexible multi-tasking uses, by exploiting the ability of afull-function Web browser to maintain multiple sub-sessions with fullstate and rapid access to active resources. Also depicted in FIG. 9, areembedded ads, as discussed above, such an embedded ad 940 that mightusefully be placed with the control panel 920, and other embedded ads945 that might be placed in the various enhancement pages. It will alsobe understood that similar ads might similarly be placed in any or allof the various layouts depicted in FIG. 3.

In the exemplary embodiment depicted in FIG. 9, two enhancement channelsare shown as active for each program or ad, with one being independentlysourced, and one being sourced through the auspices of the programmer ofthe primary program. Alternative embodiments might not offer independentenhancement channels, or might offer many such channels, and might usesimpler or more complex user interfaces and control panels to navigatesuch resources. The example shown here might correspond to a case wherethe provider of the portal cooperated with the programmers to includetheir enhancement channel, and also provided a single set of independentenhancement channels, one per program or ad, for example, such as onesthat might be under the portal provider's own control. Thus each ofthese two alternative enhancement channels might be complementary and beroutinely activated on the PC as part of a standing session whenever thecorresponding primary program or ad was active on the TV, to be updatedautomatically as program-related triggers or other TV viewing statechanges occur. A wide variety of behaviors might be provided for, toaddress such state changes, as well as user actions, and such behaviorsmight be governed by various rules, defaults, and/or preferences set byusers, and/or portal or service operators or software providers, and/orprimary program authors/programmers, as described previously.

In this example, standing sessions might be defined to routinelymaintain a base level of coordination with the TV viewing. Controlissues in such a case might include what number of primary programchannels might have active enhancement channels held open and activelyresponsive to time-based resource update triggers, and what number ofads might be similarly held active for each channel. Such control mightalso relate to which windows are placed on top, which are maintained,and which are closed or reused. For example, one default might be tohave a current and one last channel active, and up to two or three ormore ads for each of those channels. In such a context, it will beunderstood that VOD viewing might be treated as being in a virtualchannel, along with any associated ads. Conventions might also providethat ad enhancements do not pop to the top if interaction was made withenhancements relating to the primary program within the last fewminutes, but that the ad pops to the top otherwise, and that ad windowsremain open until the next commercial break, and then are reused,possibly with all URLs placed on a suitably structured history list, asdescribed above. Corresponding set of rules might determine whether theprogram enhancement page pops back to the top at the end of a commercialbreak, and under what conditions the window order and focus changes whena channel change is made, as well as when and how composite pages arereconstituted. In regard to these controls, the portal operator might beconsidered as having the role of (secondary) author, and use authorcontrol coding techniques accordingly.

Similarly, if as in this example, multiple enhancement channels are tobe concurrently active, controls might also address which of thealternative channels is given precedence to appear on top, such aswhether a programmer or advertiser-provided enhancement channel or anindependent enhancement channel is favored. Such a capability might beappropriate, for example, to vary prominence depending on the nature ofbusiness arrangements between the portal service operator and theprogrammer or the advertising distributor. For instance, where a portaloperator was compensated for traffic linked to an advertisers Web site,top billing might be desired, while in cases where no such accommodationwas made, secondary billing might be desired.

Similarly, enhancement resources might be specific and dynamicallycustomized to both the viewer and the program or ad being viewed, ormight be more generic, and again, this might depend on the businessarrangements in place, such in with regard to levels of cooperation andcompensation. It will be understood that common dynamic Web servingtechniques might be used to make ad enhancement resources take formsthat are highly tuned to the specific advertisement, and to the viewer.Thus these alternative configurations, controls, and set behaviors mightbe used to support a wide variety of options providing varying levels ofpower and flexibility to users, programmers, service operators, andothers, depending on the business arrangements, objectives, and methodsto be served. Given the potential of such services to drive t-commerce,it might be useful business practice to offer valuable suites ofenhancements, both to the content programs and the advertisementprograms, in order to attract viewers to use such services and thusengage in revenue-generating t-commerce as a result.

Continuing with this example, some aspects of context-awareness alludedto above are now expanded upon. Simple attentive interface methods mightbe employed to determine that a secondary device set was being activatedor deactivated, as noted above, and/or to provide a more subtle level oftransition of focus such as when a handheld device was put aside butintended to remain in a ready, active state. Such states might bedistinguished as, for example “at attention,” a mode of active,lean-forward use, or “at ease,” a mode of more passive, lean-backreadiness. Such states might be determined through sensing of motionchange, such as by accelerometer, to rest on a fixed table or back tohand-held, or through some inferred or conventionally establishedgesture, such as, for example, a particular change in tilt, holding orstowing of a stylus, or the like, or by other means. Of course such achange might also be signaled by some explicit command.

The effect of such a mode change might be defined to change theallocation of resources, for example, by shifting tickers from a fullform on the PC, when at attention, to a more compact form on the TV,when at ease. Similarly, more advanced contextual sensors, such as eyetrackers, might be exploited to infer similar changes from at attentionto at ease, as well as finer gradations in focus among device sets andamong elements presented on a given device set. For example, parametersof the display style might be altered, whether element-by-element, oramong a few preset variations. Examples of parameters that might bealtered include the relative size of windows sensed as being in focus(e.g., with reduction and/or minimization and/or overlay of others) andalternative presentation modes. Such alternative presentation modesmight, for instance, include such modalities as tickers versus statictext windows, and variations in how intrusively and/or insistently aviewer's attention is drawn to alerts or new items (e.g., using visualor audio cues), and where they are placed. A further use ofattention-based methods might be to adapt the level of detail/resolutionpresented in a window, or a portion of a window, depending on whether,where, and how a user was viewing it.

Broader Aspects of Multi-Channel Hypermedia

Further considering multi-channel services, it should be noted that manyaspects of programming channels may apply to groupings of programs intological channels as well as the conventional TV channels that aredefined in terms of physical communications transport channels, such asthose relating to radio frequencies. Logical channel groupings may havesignificance for branding, such as relating to the brand identificationand associations of a source and its desirable attributes, or otherpurposes, such as genre or other categories. As programming that lacksidentification with a physical transmission channel becomes popular,such as VOD, such logical channel identifications may be used to providesimilar product differentiation, such as for HBO, MTV, ESPN, and thelike, much as conventional Web portals refer to channels of Web contentby genre or publisher. Similar groupings of logical channels have beenaddressed herein with regard to enhancement channels, and warrants somefurther clarification.

As background, current ITV systems and the Web and other hypermedia areessentially monolithic in treating all content resources as part of asingle hypermedia resource space, with a single set of connecting links.Content aggregations may exist in the form of portal sites and the like,but the boundaries of such portals are just standard hyperlinks, andinherently transparent and undifferentiated with regard to usernavigation. Navigation may change over boundaries of media type, such asfrom pure TV or video to hypertext or similar enhancements, but this isa function of the intrinsic resource media types, with no cue as toother attributes, such as their content or authorship or membership in acollection. ITV enhancements may be provided at any level of theauthoring/production/distribution chain, without any inherentdifferentiation in user presentation or navigation of links. There areways to provide user-recognizable cues to the nature of content withinthe content itself, such as by labeling or graphic branding of thecontent, as well as optionally by icons or text labels or the likewithin the display of a hyperlink, but these do not affect navigationfunctions—such cues have no special effect on how the resource ispresented or subject to navigation. In any case, enhancements fromwhatever source are either available or not, and if multiplealternatives are available, the user must view and choose among them atan individual link and resource level.

This currently undifferentiated structure is limiting, and this isparticularly relevant to ITV and similar video-centric hypermedia, giventhat the creation of enhancements may often be more or less independentof the creation of the base video. The base TV or video may bepre-existing, and even when made with ITV in mind, TV productionprocesses tend to be very different from those of Web-like enhancements,involving different talents, skills, methods, and tools. Separateproduction groups may be involved with little or no coordination.Furthermore, different sets of enhancements may be suited to differentaudience subsets. Such issues also apply to hypermedia in general, andissues of branding and site delineation, such as how to handle linksthat take a user beyond a given site or walled garden, have been aconcern on the Web.

Current methods for organizing, grouping, and aggregating contentresources that are widely used on the Web include Web portals and thecustomization/personalization services such portals may provide. Still,these methods do not facilitate user recognition and selection ofdifferentiated content. Portals provide pages of aggregated and/orselected links. Personalization in this context generally can beunderstood as filtering of such links. In personalization, programmedmethods are used to pre-select from a superset of possible resources andlinks, and present a custom filtered subset of appropriate options, inthe form of a custom, dynamically composed resource containing thepre-selected content and/or links. With personalization, each user seesa single custom-filtered view of the hypermedia in the form of acustomized set of pages of links. There is no clear and understandableboundary or criterion for what is in our out of a filtered set, and thelogic of inclusion and exclusion may often be unclear. This can make itdifficult for users to get the experience they seek. The user may beable to change filter parameters, or navigate to an alternate filteringservice, but must undertake multiple navigation or transactional stepsto do so, and then must take similar steps to make any further change to(or to restore) those filtering processes. Conventional Web portals arejust additional resources that provide Web pages that add an aggregationstructure (and may offer filtering as well). This can offer a usefullevel of control, but one that is still awkward and limiting.

These current methods do not provide a clear and simple way to selectamong complete alternative hypermedia structures. The current methodsfail, for example, to allow for selection among complete structures to,perhaps, enable a user to select among a variety of parallel sets ofresources, each selected or filtered to address different aspects of ahypermedia need, with a single action that switches the user's sessionfrom one set of resources to another. Such a selection capability mightbe useful, for example, for ITV or similar browsing from video, in whichalternative sets of enhancements might be provided. It could also beuseful to select among alternative sets of filters. Currently there isno such facility to do this for such systems.

Currently, authors and producers may select among sets of resources anduse tools to assist in such selection during content production andmanagement, but this sourcing and composing structure is largely hiddenin the final presentation of resources to the user for viewing andnavigation. Thus, bugs or other cues may make it apparent to the userwhen enhancements are available for a TV program, but there is no cleardifferentiation among these available enhancements, whether by source ortype or other criterion. The user has no simple way to understand orselect among different sets of resources as sets of resources, not justindividual resources. In contrast, via various embodiments of thepresent invention, a user can be provided with simpler and clearer waysto understand relationships and select among alternative resource linksas entire sets, such as, for example, by type, source, function, style,depth, and the like. This is useful for ITV enhancement resources inparticular, and can be useful more generally as well.

It is further noted that provided via various embodiments of the presentinvention is a way to enable mass market ITV and hypermedia systems toallow multiple creative organizations to create linkbase aggregationssuited to different audience interests and needs, to allow users tosimply understand the character of available aggregations from varioussources, and to provide simple and flexible controls for users to selectwhich combination of linkbases will be used at any point in a browsingsession. Just as linear media publishing developed into an industry bygoing beyond individual publications to exploit branding within anaggregation process, such that a brand carries associations of style,quality, orientation, voice, orientation, and the like, that could bemarketed and selected as a group, similar flexible capabilities foraggregation and branding of linkbases could enable a rich hypermediaindustry.

From this perspective, the varying embodiments of systems and methodsfor navigating hypermedia such as ITV described herein that allow forselection of alternative enhancement channels might be thought of asproviding simple and powerful way to organize the presentation andnavigation of alternative linkbases. Enhancement channels can, forexample, serve as a convenient way to identify and select amongaggregated and customized linkbase sets that could, for instance, beeasily understood and chosen by users based on their needs and tastes atany moment.

Various embodiments of the present invention exploit the nature ofthird-party arcs and the collection of such arcs into linkbases, todefine alternative sets of arcs or linkbases identified as enhancementchannels (ECs). Accordingly, a level of aggregation can be introducedthat associates entire sets of link arcs related to a resource (orfamily of resources), and to enable a simple process of choosing amongalternative linkbase sets.

Just as channels provide a way for a user to understand and select amongsets of TV programs, enhancement channels could provide a way for a userto understand and select among sets of enhancement resources.Accordingly, a powerful congruence can be provided, both in terms ofuser understanding and action, and in terms of system structure andnavigation methods. Although discussion herein primarily emphasizes theuse of ECs with regard to ITV and similar hypermedia, it will beapparent to one skilled in the art that this use of a channel structurecan be a powerful addition to any hypermedia system. These channelsmight be more broadly referred to as resource channels (RCs), and itwill be understood that methods described herein as relating to ECs aremeant to be broadly applicable to any kind of RC, and that just as ECsmay act to provide an added dimension of links to primary continuousmedia resources, RCs might more generally provide an added dimension oflinks to any kind of resources.

For example, multiple RCs could be offered for any or all links on asimple Web page, such as by using the EC channel selector that wasdescribed earlier and is discussed below. Such a channel selector might,for instance, be activated on mouse over for any link, and could be usedto select among alternative channels of resources associated with thatstarting resource to actuate a traversal. Other applications tonon-continuous resources of methods that are described herein withreference to ECs and ECSs relating to continuous media will be apparentto those skilled in the art based on the teachings herein. In thisregard, it is noted that while the term “enhancement” is used hereinwith emphasis on the case of enhancements to continuous media resources,any linked ending resource might be considered to be an enhancement to astarting resource of any kind, and, unless clear from context orotherwise indicated, such usage is meant to be included as well, and,similarly, the terms EC and RC may be used synonymously.

With regard to conventional television, and similarly in conventionalWeb portals and Internet “push” services, channels might be thought ofas defining groupings of resources in ways that relate to either or bothof sourcing and content affinities. It should be remembered however, asnoted above, that the channels of current Web portals, unlike televisionchannels, may be viewed as having no real navigational significance, asthe channels of current web portals exist as logical channels only byexternal convention. For example, the channels of current web portalsmight only exist as channels as so labeled and maintained by the portal,and as so understood by the user. Most often, channels are understood toimply aggregation that typically, but not necessarily, reflects both asourcing relationship and an editorial content association. Theserelationships reinforce one another and aid in mutual selection betweenchannel programmers and users, where the users constitute an audiencefor the channel programmers and each has some understanding of theother. The concept of enhancement channels described herein is similar,and can provide a second level of selectivity with regard to a primaryprogram channel. Enhancement channels may also be understood to applyacross multiple base, or primary program channels (PPCs), providing asimilar style of enhancement to each primary program channel.

As aggregations of third party link arcs, ECs are separable from thePPCs they relate to, and this may have value, for example, in termsof 1) division of labor and skills in production, so that work processesmay be separated, 2) decoupling of EC content and style from that of thebase program to allow for alternative presentations oriented todifferent market segments. This separability may have the furtherbenefit of allowing competitive sourcing of ECs, which can potentiallyfacilitate greater creativity, emergence of alternative voices, andgreater consumer choice, as well as supporting a more dynamic andefficient market for EC production. Such decoupling and choice mightprofoundly enhance and expand the market for ITV and similar hypermedia.

Thus, in one family of embodiments ECs might be thought of as involvinga secondary channel selector for enhancement channels, as was alluded toabove. TV viewing traditionally involves a channel selector forselecting a primary program. Equivalent selections may be made by othermeans, such as for virtual channels broadcast in various streams, or forstored programs obtained by a VOD system or DVR or other archival orasynchronous source. Various embodiments of the present invention add asecondary enhancement channel selector (ECS), which uses information onthe primary program and the available enhancements to present a conciseset of alternatives for the user to select from in real time. Suchalternatives may be ranked by pre-defined preferences and filters andmay have preset defaults, but the essence of the channel selector is therealtime control of selection among alternative sets of enhancements.Depending upon the business context of the embodiment, such EC sets maybe open, or may be limited to those sanctioned by a programmer and/ordistributor and/or other party.

This concept of EC selection might be embodied in forms that blendchannel selection with other forms of link selection and that does notprovide clear differentiation in the controls used to select them, ormight be accomplished with specific controls for channel selection,including forms analogous to the use of a traditional primary channelselection control. It might, for example, be desirable that theenhancement channel selector is always handy, and provides a simple wayto select among alternatives. Alternatives could, for instance, includea subset of preferred alternatives, possibly using a simple control muchlike traditional program channel selectors, a more complete set, or somecombination enabled by a more sophisticated control. It is noted that:

-   -   Like primary program channel selectors, such an EC channel        selector control might latch in a channel until a further        channel change/selection action is taken    -   Simple controls might be based on a basic remote control, and        might simply enter EC numbers just as for primary channels,        possibly by first hitting a special enhancement function key        that changes mode, much like a channel guide key does.    -   Such a key might enable a full-fledged EC Program Guide (ECPG)        that displays an EPG-like service showing the alternative ECs.        Such an ECPG might desirably show just the ECs associated with        the current program. Other key sequences (or other controls)        could change the primary channel for which ECs are to be viewed.    -   If invoked from the EPG, the control might display the ECs        associated with the primary channel that is being referenced in        the EPG, rather than the active primary channel that is being        viewed.    -   This ECPG might appear on the same screen as the EPG, or        preferably as an option, on an alternate screen. In a flexible        windowing environment, there might be separate software windows        for each of the program, the EPG, and the ECPG (as well as for        the enhancements), and in a multi-display configuration, these        might be physically allocated to displays in any combination, as        desired.    -   As described above, multiple ECs may be usable concurrently,        using advanced display interfaces that can display separate ECs        in separate display/control channels (DCCs), and having separate        windows and controls (or by blending the enhancements), and the        channel selector would preferably support that. A control could        first indicate which EC DCC was being referenced (such as by        rotation of focus through all active DCCS, or by a DCC number        entry) and then select which EC is to be viewed in that DCC, as        just described.    -   In advanced systems with computer-like high resolution displays        and GUIs, a wide variety of more powerful controls might be        applied to create a rich ECS facility. For example, ECs might be        selected from cascading drop down lists (like those used in the        Windows start menu or browser favorites list). Such ECSs might        be always visible in a tool bar, or might appear as needed,        triggered by mouse-overs, control keys, or the like.

It will be understood that such controls may be provided as part of anenhancement portal, and/or provided as a local browser function. Suchcontrols might, for example, be applied in setup actions prior tobrowsing, such as in the form of an alternative EC selection screen orcontrol panel, and/or might also be applied during viewing, such as, forinstance in a pane or additional window, or in pop-up controls, asdescribed herein with regard to FIG. 9 and elsewhere. It will further beapparent that while embodiments of multichannel and open enhancementservices described herein could be applied using MMUI-based systems, allsuch services might, in various embodiments, be applicable in SMUIcontexts as well. Such applications might suffer only the more or lessserious limitation of a less powerful user interface, and such SMUTinterfaces might be extended as described herein, as well as inadditional respects that parallel the MMUI facilities described herein,as will be apparent to one skilled in the art based on the teachingsherein.

The ability to provide such a range of supplementary materialsynchronized with TV, movies (broadcast or DVD), and/or other contentmight be viewed as offering an entirely new dimension in media thattruly blends the immediacy of TV with the dynamics, creativity, andinnovation of the open Web. These might span a wide spectrum of broadgeneral-interest entertainment portals, and highly of specializedinformation and supplementary services. Some possible examples, based onimagined extensions of existing brands using these methods, include:

-   -   A Yahoo or AOL general set of ECs with broad services and        multiple levels of personalization and sub-areas. Such a service        might offer a page for each program with varied links and        services, with varying sets for varying interests and levels of        personalization.    -   An Internet Movie DataBase (IMDB) EC that could always show the        main page for any movie currently being viewed.    -   A Travelocity EC that could provide travel information about any        locales relating to current programming or commercials.    -   A brokerage firm EC that could tie to currently airing business        news on any and all channels.    -   A sports EC that could supplement any sports programming (of any        kind, or for specific sports)    -   A games EC that could supplement any and all games shows, using        sanctioned material from producers or independent material.    -   A Pacifica or John Birch EC that could offer alternative        political views related to current programming.    -   A Scientific American or Encyclopedia Britannica EC that could        offer supplementary content    -   A National Lampoon EC that could offer parodies.    -   An Amazon or Barnes and Noble EC that could offer books related        to programming    -   A Macy's or Kmart, Neiman Marcus or Amazon EC that could offer        general merchandise related to programming.    -   An About.com EC that uses specialist volunteer enthusiasts to        create special interest enhancements related to programming.    -   An EC Brand associated with a primary program channel brand,        such as ABC, HBO, CNN, ESPN, GSN, Nickelodeon, and the like,        that might be limited to programs carried on those respective        channels or might cover other programming as well, thus        providing a new form of brand competition.

It is noted that that each of these could be “always on” in a toolbar,or otherwise reachable via standard Web browsing facilities, dependingon the user's preferences. It will also be understood that any such ECcould also be provided in the form of a full EC portal, either with orwithout other ECs, and that the distinction between an EC and an ECportal, given the possible use of syndication and Web services methods,might become indistinct to the point that the two are largelyinterchangeable, and differ only in emphasis.

As described with regard to FIG. 9, an ITV presentation drawing on suchECs might be structured to give users choices as to whether a singlechosen ITV stream was seen or whether alternative enhancements might bepresented, either as options to be approved, or automatically in amulti-enhancement presentation. One scheme might give preference bypriority to selected alternatives, but also display primary(base-program-sourced) enhancements in addition, or when no higherpriority equivalent was available.

For example, a user might want both the primary HBO enhancements and theIMDB enhancements as a lower priority to be shown in addition, or mightwant the Merrill Lynch enhancements to have priority over the CNBC orMSNBC enhancements. The user might want the (base-program-sourced) realtime enhancements to Millionaire to have priority over a lesstime-sensitive enhancement from Encyclopedia Britannica. Such prioritiesmight be specified globally, and within a content/channel categorystructure. Rich UI alternatives might be applied to present theresources associated with any of multiple active ECs. These mightinclude any combination of the methods described above. For example,panes/frames might be desirable for concurrent viewing of the resourcesof multiple ECs, while tabbed windows/pages might be useful for viewingsuch resources in alternation.

As noted, the lack of advance access to live programming might putindependent enhancement providers/producers at a disadvantage. However,tools might be provided to scan programming and create dynamicassociations in real time. Such scanning might, for example, involveautomated speech and image recognition. It is noted that human editorsmight supplement automated tools. For instance, human editors mightenter key words and/or synopses, and/or edit out poor matches. Standardtemplates might be used with only minor variation from episode toepisode. The significant portion of programming that is not entirely new(reruns, movies, etc.), might require less processing, effort, and/orthe like. The task, might, for example, be much like that ofconventional live news or sports programming, where the unexpected isdealt with in a framework of preparedness. For loosely synchronizedenhancements, independent sourcing might require less processing,effort, and/or the like.

With further regard to the concept of multiple ECs and the motivationfor such services, the association of channels with brands will befurther discussed. Brands may be thought of as well-known sets ofofferings with recognized attributes, including soft factors such aspsychological and social associations. Further, current TV channels maybe thought of as having brands, such as MTV for youth culture andcoolness, CNN for global awareness, Fox News for conservative opinion,CBS (formerly) for being “the Tiffany network” Further, specific series,shows, and/or the like (e.g., The West Wing, Friends, or the US TennisOpen) might be thought of as being associated with brands. Such might beused by commercial sponsors to select demographics and/orpsychographics, and/or to benefit from the contextual image of a brand.

Similar branding might be established for enhancement channels, based onobjective topical factors, as well as these more subjective factors.Even in closed ETV environments, such use of multiple EC alternativesmight be desirable to exploit the power of branding as well as to enableuse of task-specific selection criteria for tailoring enhancement setsto users.

Extending the discussion above, it is noted that the concepts ofpersonalization/customization, as emphasized in interactive media, andchannelization, as applied in more traditional media and as extendedherein, might, in various embodiments, be related and/or complementary.Personalization as applied on the Web and proposed in emerging digitalTV services focuses on building a customized experience tuned to thedesires and interests of the user. It is noted that:

-   -   Personalization can involve filtering. Filtering can employ        various methods (filters) to select items of probable interest        from a large set of available items, and thus might be viewed as        being primarily subtractive, excluding items that fail to pass        the filter.    -   Channelization might be viewed as a related method which may be        in part a result of filtering, or may be subsequently filtered,        but channels may have a primarily additive effect in that they        may draw from diverse sources of possible items, and may be        selected using diverse filtering criteria. Channels in general        might be independently sourced, and may be created and selected        based on diverse criteria, sensibilities, and methods. A major        appeal of branded channels might be the distinctiveness of their        sourcing and selection.

Such distinction can have some subtlety, since channels might be publicchannels (which may have branding effects), but might also be privatelycreated and defined. The use of named filters might be viewed ascreating a private channel, such as a filter for world news, one formedia business news, one for selected stocks, one for Astaire and Rogersmovies, or one for dirty jokes. Such personal channels may becharacterized by defined differences in sourcing and/or selection.Conversely, filters might be applied to compose sets of selections frommultiple channels (e.g., by a logical OR). Branded channels might alsohave the characteristic of being publicly recognized as having asharable personality, unlike private personalized channels. The appealof brands might relate to this common recognition of shared taste orcachet.

An aspect of channels as addressed herein is that channels may have realdiversity in both what they draw on and how they are selected. Theymight, for instance, be sourced from different creative sources,aggregated based on different sensibilities, and filtered based ondifferent methods. For example, the filtering methods might differ notonly in the filter criteria, but also in the algorithms, both as todetails of parameters and rules and weightings, and as to fundamentalmethods, such as Boolean, fuzzy, collaborative filtering, agent-drivensearching, and others.

In current systems, content enhancements are recognized as needing somelevel of selection of alternatives with regard to form, not content,such as for language and for device presentation characteristics such ascache size or bandwidth (as provided in the ATVEF proposal).Importantly, such selections relate to variant versions of what areessentially the same enhancement content items, not to selection amongdissimilar alternative enhancement items. Current systems provide verylimited facilities for user selection of alternative enhancements withregard to content. Virtual channels (VCs) provide a crude way to selectby creating multiple primary content channels including varying sets ofassociated enhancements. Different VCs could contain the same primaryprogram, and thus could implicitly offer different enhancements to beselected by selecting the VC that includes those enhancements. Thetwo-level selection of primary channel and then a corresponding ECdescribed herein is potentially far more flexible, scalable, andextensible, and could work well for both small and large numbers ofalternatives. One aspect of this is simple combinatorial math—each of nchannels might offer each of m ECs, instead of having to keep track of ntimes m VCs (m enhancement channels for each of n primary programs). Inaddition, this might allow for selection of multiple ECs to beconcurrently active for a program, which simple VCs would not enable.

An additional benefit of channels is that a user can select differentchannels over time. Over short periods this may be desirable toaccommodate changes in mood, task, pace. This might enable a user tomanage his psychological flow (in the sense of flow described byCsikszentmihalyi) over time, and to adapt to changing tasks orCircumstances. In the longer term, channels might be selected based onchanging tastes or fashions. Similar changes of effect might be achievedto some limited degree with filtering, as well, but that would involvemuch more complex variation in many filtering criteria and methods.Channels, including the concept of enhancement channels describedherein, can offer a simple way to operate at a higher level (which canbe thought of as selecting among pre-defined families of filters).

Related to this, it is noted that various teachings herein relate to achanging nature of TV viewing, from the historical model of ongoingchannels, which happen to carry an externally defined sequence ofprograms, to a program-oriented medium that might or might not beorganized into physical or logical channels. This might be understood interms of the basic analog TV set, in which channels are tuned to, andthe set then plays whatever program series happens to appear within thechannel, compared to an advanced system, such as one with VOD or DVRfunctions, in which it is effectively an individual program that isselected, and any channel identity might be incidental.

As noted above, some of the benefits that might be achieved by themethods described herein relating to the use, distribution, and businessmodels relating to enhancements include:

-   -   Unbundling of enhancement production and distribution from that        of the base programming    -   Decoupling of enhancements and triggers to support saved        programs and time-agnostic use    -   Rich features for open linkage of ads to resources    -   Reduction of enhancement content creation costs relating to full        exploitation of Web technologies, automation,        repurposing/adaptation of content, and open participation of        diverse contributors    -   Ability to associate TV viewing contexts with direct access to        relevant enhancement resources available in existing Web sites.    -   Enabling new business and investment opportunities for        entrepreneurial creation of new content and distribution models    -   Bypassing potential resistance and conflicts in business models        among established players who might not be supportive of        introduction of new methods    -   Ability to work with current and emerging consumer systems and        infrastructures    -   Simple, intuitive, and highly automated use

It is noted that various of these address multi-channel capabilities ata number of levels. One such level is the multi-channel aspect of thebase programs. Another such level is the multi-channel aspect of theenhancement channels. To clarify this further as they apply toalternative embodiments, in some cases it might be useful to distinguishbetween:

-   -   a linkbase starting link source, which determines how links and        starting resources are defined    -   an enhancement channel resource set, which determines the ending        resources of an enhancement channel    -   a linkbase link resolver, which enables an enhancement channel        to be realized by associating the enhancement channel resource        set with a linkbase starting link source.

This may be useful in considering that linkbase starting link sourcesmight, for example, be independently produced and/or derived from linksthat are embedded with or otherwise directly associated with baseprograms, such as, for example ATVEF trigger streams, and that suchstarting link sources might contain and/or have directly associatedspecifications of ending resources. As noted above, link resolvertechniques, such as those based on proxying and/or redirection, might beused to break an explicit association with ending resources and/or topermit use of open enhancement channels even where such openness was notprovided for. Thus all three dimensions might be constrained, or theremight be flexibility in any or all of these dimensions, depending on theembodiment.

One exemplary architecture for a flexible multi-channel servicesupporting open and independently provided ECs might be defined in termsof a series of tables that can be used to control what links arepresented and how they are resolved. These tables might include one ormore of the following entries, perhaps organized into columns:

-   -   Linkbase starting link source. This might have entries to        indicate whether links and/or triggers were embedded or        otherwise directly associated with a base program, or to specify        a URL, or some other identifier and/or locator, that can be used        to obtain link and starting resource information, and which        might have associated type or other parameter information.    -   Linkbase resolver. This might have entries to indicate        alternative resolver services. A portal service, whether remote        or local, as described, which might be one of many, might imply        a single resolver service, or it might provide for alternative        sets of resolvers, thus effectively creating a chained or        hierarchical specification of portals and resolvers. Thus these        entries might be implied or explicit, and might include URLs, or        other identifiers and/or locators, with parameters as        appropriate, for locating one or more levels of resolvers.    -   Enhancement channel. The channels might be implied by the        resolver or portal, but in the more general case, separate        specification might be desirable, such as for example to allow        sets of ECs to be independently provided, and to be reachable        through the services of any of multiple resolvers and/or        portals. Again, the entries might be implied or explicit, and        might include URLs, or other identifiers and/or locators, with        parameters as appropriate, for one or more levels of resolvers.    -   Applicability/Scope. This might selectively specify, in any of        multiple dimensions, when the sources, resolvers, and ECs are to        be applied. This might be used to define scopes that apply by        time, such as to time of day or daypart, day of week, and/or        specific time slots, by program category or genre, and/or by        channel and/or program, so that different combinations might        apply under different, defined, circumstances.    -   Time base. This might indicate whether selections apply to an        entire program, or for specific time spans or time positions.    -   Presentation. This information could relate the selection of        linkbases and ECs to the control of how they are presented. This        would address variables such as described above, including such        factors as choice of devices set, whether links are activated        only on request or automatically, whether windows are full,        sized, or minimized, whether they are tiled or stacked,        ordering, priority, and control of focus, and other such        behaviors.

It will be understood that this exemplary architecture might be cast indifferent forms without departing from the spirit of the methodsdescribed herein.

With regard to all of the URL or other identifiers/locators, it is notedthat such might be implied or listed in a closed group, and might thusbe controlled by the service provider and closed to user modification.Alternately or additionally, such might permit arbitrary entry of suchspecifications by users, thus providing an open facility that cansupport any linkbase sources and resolvers and any ECs that a userdesires. As noted above, the elements contained in these tables might becontrolled at varied levels and times, including, for instance:

-   -   Pre-specification by product/service providers    -   Ongoing specification of user-specific defaults that persist        until changed, and apply across sessions, including        specifications made during a setup process or subsequently    -   Real-time navigation/presentation controls that are applied        during browsing, and which may have a scope that is limited in        scope, such as to a single link or a single program, or that        persists during that session.

The various embodiments and user interface variations described above,as well as many other variations, might be viewed as more or less fullydeveloped instances of an architecture involving these factors. Forexample, the user interface of FIG. 9 might be defined in terms of anadvance specification made using this table structure to define the ECsto be included as well as the presentation formats for and across each.An alternative implementation could involve less advance setup, and usecontrols at the time of link presentation, such as the EC channelselector control as described above, which presents links as they relateto starting resources, and allows the user to select among alternativeECs and their corresponding ending resources at the time of viewing.Such methods might be combined to provide rich interfaces with highlyflexible control. From this perspective, the overall process might thusbe viewed, for example, as:

-   -   Enabling viewers to select a primary TV program and/or channel,        or other similar primary resource that serves as primary        starting resource    -   Enabling specification of a set-up of 1) a base format for        presentation of EC links and/or ending resources, and 2) a base        selection of linkbase sources, resolvers, and ECs, such as using        the tabular architecture just described    -   Supporting a presentation of EC links and/or ending resources in        accord with that set-up    -   Enabling dynamic control to actuate links and/or perform other        navigation and control, and to alter the set-up on a temporary        or permanent basis.

Other dimensions of variation include how links are aggregated, andwhether they are user-activated or automatic. With regard toaggregation, it is noted that simple forms of enhancement to TV or othervideo may be understood as un-aggregated, as simply a series of atomiclinks having no particular relationship (except for their associationwith a given program). For example this may be appropriate to simplecases of individual embedded links, or of simple series, such as ATVEFstreams, within a particular program. Portions of the discussion hereinrelate to features and benefits of more advanced forms of aggregation,such as where links are aggregated into ECs, and where control of ECsmight have a scope that corresponds to a program, or channel, orsession, or other useful period of use, such as relating to viewing ofone or more continuous media resources as an ongoing activity, or tosets of such periods, such as by series or genre.

With regard to activation, as described above, this may be by useraction or automatic, and patterns of such control might vary indifferent usage contexts. For example, when viewing enhancements on a TVscreen, it might be desirable to minimize use of automatic activation,so that overlay of enhancements is “opt-in” by explicit request at thetime, in contrast to usage of a second screen, in which case automaticpresentation of ending resources might be desirable to have some set ofcurrent enhancements “always-on,” for some period, such as in thestanding sessions described above.

It is also noted, as indicated above, that linkbase resolvers might forma chain or hierarchy. Such a capability can, for example, provide forrich configurations of resolvers and/or for complex relationships. Suchconfigurations of resolvers might involve, for example, multiple sourcesof service, while such complex relationships might include, for example,mixtures of manually authored and automatically generated linkbasesand/or enhancements, which might include complex systems of agents,filters, views, and aggregators applicable to provide useful enhancementmaterial and value-added custom production processes, drawing frommixtures of pre-existing and dynamically generated content, Again, itwill be understood that such combinations might involve any combinationof advance and/or real-time specification by the user, the providers, orothers.

It is also noted that some of the variations described herein can beunderstood as forms of “n-ary links.” This relates to the idea thatsimple links might be viewed as binary, linking a single startingresource to a single ending resource. The use of multiple ECs might beunderstood as offering multiple ending resources to “a” link having agiven starting resource. Conversely, automated or other generic linkgeneration methods can be thought of as providing links with a givenending resource, or set of ending resources, to any of multiple startingresources having some common feature. This might be used, for example,for links that are generic to such features as an object, a person, aplace, a series of episodes, a concept or topic, and/or the like.

In order to exploit both the richness of open enhancements, and thevalue of synchronicity in adding immediacy to a media such as movies andtelevision, a new business model providing for a two stage release ofnew content might be desirable. Currently movies and TV programs oftenhave release windows that concentrate viewer awareness and interestduring a premiere and/or first run period, whether for weeks with amovie, or in full synchronicity for a TV program. More generally, itwill be understood that such release windows may involve a series ofstages, such as limited or full theatrical release, VCR/DVD,pay-per-view, and VOD release, TV network premiere, TV syndicationrelease, and the like.

However independent enhancement providers might be unable to create themost effective enhancements in real time, or even within weeks. Thus, itmight be desirable to offer a special pre-release to enhancementproviders that is open to all qualified parties, but possibly restrictedfrom the general public, that is far enough in advance of the generalpremiere as to permit creation of rich enhancements to be done for thatpremiere. Such enhancements might also be cross-linked among themselves,to create a rich hypermedia fabric. Some such cross-linking might beaccomplished during the pre-release window, while further development ofenhancements might continue indefinitely.

Expanding further on the discussion of rights above, in regard to openenhancements provided independently of primary program providers, theremay be a need and opportunity for enhanced Digital Rights Managementtools to facilitate licensing of enhancement rights. According tovarious embodiments of the present invention, a new category of rightsmight be defined for enhancements to a primary content work, to theextent that such enhancements may be determined require license. Such anenhancement use might, for example, be defined as any form of trigger orlinking meant to occur in association with a presentation of a baseprogram. As another example, such an enhancement use might be morenarrowly defined in terms of any use of copyrighted or other criticalelements, such as logos, images, likenesses, music, characters, videoclips and/or the like, in such enhancements. A structure for licensingand charging could be applied, including consideration of factors suchas:

-   -   The general nature of use for the enhancement    -   Covenants to exclude prohibited contexts and uses (such as        pornography)    -   The commercial nature of the enhancing enterprise    -   The market and distribution    -   The nature of the work enhanced    -   The nature of the enhancements, such as, for example,        synchronized loosely to time of showing, synchronized to        specific time-triggers, asynchronous, or deferred.

Additional factors that might affect rates, and whether a use was to beconsidered fair use might include such factors as:

-   -   The extent of material to be used (absolutely and/or relative to        the total work)    -   The nature of any transformations or alterations to be applied    -   The process and/or terms for payment of license fees for use of        the base work    -   What other existing works (or categories of works) are to be        included in the derived work

For many of these factors, it might be desirable to apply an enforceableand/or auditable category structure. Such a structure might, forinstance, be defined in XML. Pre-defined scales of license fees mightapply based on such criteria, or might be negotiated by the enhancementproducer. Such licensing actions and fees might also be deferred to theultimate user under a suitably simple and robust mechanism. The latterapproach might be especially relevant to embodiments in which sensitiveelements from primary program resources might be virtually embedded inenhancement resources by a linking reference. In this way, theenhancement provider might not need to provide sensitive elements, butinstead could indicate to a viewer's system that the elements should beobtained and included, and that process might then be considered to be amatter between the viewer and the primary resource provider.

Such a DRM extension might also include audit and reporting functions toadvise all parties of proper licensing and usage, and might requireintegrity controls. For example, it might be required that all providersof presentation systems build in protected and trusted DRM mechanisms toprevent unlicensed uses, just as manufacturers of some recording devicesinclude copy protection mechanisms. Such DRM mechanisms as describedhere might be built using the same kinds of techniques as used for moretraditional content types, with possible minor variations and extensionsas will be apparent to one skilled in the art based on the teachingsherein.

Related to this is the possible extension of DRM to managing fair use.To the extent that DRM mechanics can be relied on to reasonably ensurethat fair use is actually limited to what is recognized to be fair usebased on measurable or certifiable criteria, and that other uses arepermitted only if licensed accordingly, a major expansion of the mediaeconomy might be enabled. Such a mechanism might be based on softwareagents using rule-based negotiation. Obtaining agreement on the rulesmight be challenging, but as evolving DRM methods prove that suchmechanisms can work for other rights aspects, a degree of trust might beachieved and the rule setting for this more advanced level of DRM mightbe undertaken in a positive context of cooperation.

As alluded to above, enhancement channels might, for example, be viewedas providing a simple and powerful way to organize the presentation andnavigation of alternative linkbases. However, from one point of view,such is an abstraction that is layered on top of the underlyinghypermedia space in which all resources of all kinds may be arbitrarilyinterlinked and/or deeply intertwingled. Further, it should be kept inmind that TV or other continuous media channels and programs can, invarious embodiments, serve as both starting resources and endingresources in such structures of links and linkbases, without limitation.Such direct or indirect cross-linkage of continuous media resources can,for example, provide an open-ended range of powerful capabilities inhypermedia browsing. Such linkage, for instance, might take rich formsthat cross continuous media resources without regard to type and/or withspecific structures that cross between such types as channels, major andminor channels, alternate camera angles, primary programs and adprograms, as well as intermediated through other resources (e.g.,program guides, viewer communications and messaging services, advancedtransaction/information processing services, and/or the like). Suchlinkage services might involve rich relationships in hypertime, asdescribed above, and might also, for instance, involve awareness ofsynchronicity on a realtime base for live programming or appointmentviewing, and/or might highlight or select resources with regard to thatrealtime synchronicity. A few exemplary embodiments are now described.

As a first exemplary embodiment, there may be provided ECs and/orsimilar linkage services that support awareness and activation ofalternative related resources, for instance, to highlight times where achange in selection might be desirable. Such alternative relatedresources could include, for example, alternate camera angles or secondaudio programs. Such a facility could, for instance, provide a newmedium capability in which program producers and/or third parties couldprovide services that provide some of the benefits ofproducer-controlled changes of camera angle, language change vs.subtitles, and similar media selections by offering such changes asvoluntary choices by the viewer based on advisory metadata.

Such a facility could, for example, provide an experience more open thanthat of full producer control, yet with guidance that a viewer might nototherwise have at hand to inform viewer controlled selections. Thechoices might, for instance, be presented by any of the methodsdescribed herein, including presentation of link arcs for viewerselection and activation, or as input to viewer agent systems that mightintelligently manage such presentation to the user and/or automaticallyactivate selected links to provide the effect of a custom produced,personalized viewing experience. It will be understood that suchagent-mediated hypermedia experiences might consist exclusively ofcontinuous media resources or contain mixtures of continuous anddiscrete resources similar to the experience described with respect toFIG. 9, and that such experiences might be made as passive orinteractive as the viewer might specify, and that such factors might bealtered on a dynamic basis. Similar cross-program guidance might beprovided across independent channels, such as by third party ECproviders. For example, viewers following a breaking news story mightobtain advice in real time of related material airing on other channels,and thus be able to achieve a kind of smart, guided, content-awarechannel surfing, as well as richer hypermedia experiences.

According to another exemplary embodiment, smart channel surfing mightbe implemented so as to exploit increased awareness of actual broadcastscheduling, including details of advertising program scheduling. Suchmethods might, for example, combine with EPG services and/or personalviewing support agents that draw on knowledge of viewer program andchannel preferences to provide a service that ranks currently airingchannels by potential desirability, possibly factoring in realtimeknowledge and/or estimation of when advertisements are airing—and/orknowledge of content associations, as just described, and/or intelligentinference of activity/interest lulls that a viewer might wish to avoid.With such support, a channel up/down change command might change to thenext most preferred channel, and might skip channels on which ads wereactive, or based on other filtering criteria.

Similarly, a view of an EPG listing grid might be ranked and filtered bythe same kind of criteria to facilitate rapid selection of alternativeviewing. The ad-exclusion feature might be enabled when rapid surfing isdesired, and turned off when that is not a dominating decision factor.The content association features might be enabled when there is acontent thread of interest to be followed. As noted, such contentthreads might, for example, relate to news story topics, and as anotherexample, might relate to sports of a given type and/or league. It willbe noted that current EPGs provide a relatively superficial and notcompletely up to the minute view of program schedules, generally lackinginformation on late scheduling changes, time-position-specific detailsof program segment content, timing of advertisements and the like. Themethods described herein could make available rich data on those andother content and timing details, as well as on viewer preferences.Thus, via various embodiments of the present invention can be provided asmarter, richer, and more realtime EPG, perhaps drawing on such detailsfor presentation to the viewer and/or for use in smarter and moreinformation-rich selection, ranking, and categorization services.

Further, related to the earlier discussion of counter-programming, it isnoted that ECs could, in various embodiments, be employed commerciallyto direct viewers to alternative programs by using similarlyinformation-rich and personalized intelligence. Such ECs might beoffered by programmers, possibly with added services, as a method ofdeveloping and supporting viewer loyalty to their programs, and/or mightbe offered by third parties as another specialized portal service thatcombines offerings of value to viewers and to sponsors, possiblyincluding programmers and others. Such services might charge fees toviewers for the service, and/or to those programmers or other partiesfor placement of those counter-programming offers. As with other suchfees, charging elements might include fees for presentation, activation,and the like.

As another example of employing the functionality discussed herein, dataon realtime advertising placements across the channel grid could beprovided as a very compact vector, possibly with as little as one bitper channel to indicate current status as primary program oradvertisement, or with a few added bits per channel to indicate raw dataor predictions on likely duration of ad slots. Such a vector might betransmitted based on various trigger criteria, such as when thecurrently viewed channel cuts to an ad, on request, on, activation ofEPG or surfing commands, or the like. A variety of additional approachesfor efficient distribution and application of detailed and realtime, orat least very near realtime, data for a variety of client-based and/orserver-based embodiments will be apparent to those skilled in the art,based on the teachings herein.

Again, it is noted that discussion herein primarily describes TV, PC,and Internet/Web-based embodiments of portals and enhancements out ofconvenience of exposition, and that these methods apply to othercontent, such as for example movies, radio and recorded music, otherdevices, such as for example PDAs, cell phones, and other appliances, aswell as single-screen TV-based access, and to other networks, such asfor example SMS and MMS. For example, the same kind of portal servicesmight be provided for SMS-based enhancements to TV programs, such as toprovide a cell phone user access to open enhancement services for any TVprogram.

Open EC Linking on the Internet

Various core details of link handling will now be discussed in accordwith an exemplary embodiment of the above methods. The exemplaryembodiment is based on methods for passing state records that allow fora range of architectural variations in where the intelligence thatcontrols EC selection and state-dependent aspects of linking are to behandled, and that work with standard HTTP, and/or standard SOAP-basedWeb services that are not limited to use for continuous media. Forexample, the state record might be passed as a simple parameter setincluded with an HTTP request.

Consider initially a simple application in which all enhancements to theTV viewing are directed to a second-screen device set, such as aPC-based Web browser, as in many of the portal examples described above.In this case the state record might be relatively simple, reflecting aTV context that can be specified as a current program andtime-position/offset, or alternatively, with more or less precision,lacking the time-position, or in terms of some combination of channel,time-zone, and identification of the TV distribution system source thatcan be used to determine the program. This parameter set can be thoughtof as specifying the TV viewing context, and thus referred to as TVCparameters. Thus one role of the multi-channel/MMUI portal service, orof a local browser-based equivalent, can be to facilitate inclusion of aTVC parameter set with the linking process that results in a request foran ending resource.

As alluded to above, a protocol such as HTTP and/or SOAP could beemployed. HTTP parameters and/or SOAP parameters, might be defined toinclude any or all of the following:

-   -   TZ, for Time Zone, specifying the time-zone of the viewer    -   DIST, for TV distributions service, specifying the cable or        satellite system, or local broadcast region, or Internet        service, or other source designation that controls what programs        are received on what channels.    -   CH, for channel, indicating the channel number currently being        viewed, including virtual channels, major/minor channels and the        like.    -   PID, for program ID, specifying the particular program (base        content, or advertising program), using any appropriate ID        system    -   BPID, for base program ID, which might optionally specify a base        content program, which might be useful in conjunction with a PID        that specified an advertising program that was viewed in        association with that base content program.    -   TPOS, for time-position, specifying the time into the program,        relative to the start, in any convenient scheme, and/or the        current local time.    -   REG, for image region, specifying any spatial selection of        starting resource, coded in any appropriate scheme, such as by a        set of bounding vectors or shapes, or simple rectangular pixel        coordinates, or the like.    -   TVCTYPE, for TVC type, specifying any of a variety of factors        regarding how the TVC information was assembled and how it        should be interpreted. This might include information on the        source of the various parameters, whether a link was triggered        automatically or by explicit user action, and/or whether program        identification details are known precisely and currently, or        involve various approximations, such as might be relevant to        time-position, or inferences that might not be reliable, such as        might be relevant to PID, CH, and other parameters.    -   ENDURL, for ending resource URL, specifying any embedded,        explicit link information, such as might be used by a proxy        service for resolution to alternative ending resources.    -   DEMO and USER, for demographic and user data, specifying generic        and/or specific information about the user, as addressed further        below.    -   DRM, for digital rights management information, such as to        control the use of TVC data, and the management of rights        relating to the base and/or enhancement content/services.    -   Other similar parameters

Various combinations of such parameters might be determined andassembled at the browser, and/or at a remote portal service, or otherrelated service, using any of the methods described above. Suchparameters might then be included in an HTTP request, such as within theURL field as typically delimited by a “?”, in a form, or otherwise, andmight similarly be included in a SOAP-based or other similar kind of Webservices request. Alternatively, such data might be passed in cookies asdiscussed below. As noted previously, such state information might becoded using XML, and/or might be defined using object-oriented methods.

Such a request containing a TVC parameter might then be handled in anyof a variety of ways. One such method might include processing at aportal to resolve it into a particular ending resource URL based on theTVC, and to pass that request on for handling through methods such asproxying, redirection, or the like. An alternative method might besimilar, but might simply pass the request to a more generic URLdesignating an enhancement channel or other content and/or servicesource, complete with its TVC parameters (or with such parametersexpected to be obtained separately, as described below), for finalresolution of an appropriate ending resource to be made by applyingthose parameters at that service source.

Such an approach might apply little or no intelligence specific to thecurrent viewing context, leaving that to the destination service. Thismight be consistent with an approach applying the philosophy of the“stupid network,” in which intelligence is left to the nodes attached tothe network, with only simple routing done within the network. Otherschemes might include more network-based intelligence, or intelligencein a cooperating network of servers, such as to provide the multiplelevels of EC channel selection and value-added services described above.

Continuing this example, it is noted that passing the TVC parameters tothe end-server might permit it to fully manage the interpretation ofcontext and delivery of appropriate ending resources to the extent itmight desire. This can allow for implementation of a pure TVC-basedportal or local TVC-based browser accessory that operates much likeconventional Web browsing or portal services, but with the addition ofthe steps of assembling and including the TVC parameters. Alternatively,as described below, these parameters might be obtained in a separatestep. HTTP or equivalent requests with these parameters can then bepassed to any server. The receiving server could then handle thatrequest in a range of ways.

If the server is a standard server that is not TVC-context-aware, itcould ignore the parameters and simply return a generic resource, asspecified by the URL and other available information. For example, alink to abc.com, or jeopardy.com, or abc.com/jeopardy, or bmw.com,might, with no special provision for TVC use, simply return a standardpage for the designated URL, including dynamic pages using anyconventional customization features. Alternatively, with addedTVC-related intelligence, such servers might recognize parametersindicating that the viewer was at a given time-position into a givenJeopardy program, and thus return resources specific to that programepisode and time-position, such as specific Jeopardy questions and/oranswers, and the like. Similarly, a modified BMW Web site mightrecognize the PID as being a that for a particular ad, and serve pagesthat relate specifically to the cars, offers, and features addressed inthat ad, and to any time positions and/or selected regions related tothat ad. The BMW site might further recognize that the BPID was forJeopardy, and custom-tailor the page based on demographics associatedwith Jeopardy viewers. This processing might result in translation ofgeneric URLs (such as the home page) to context-specific URLs, such asby further proxying, redirection, and/or the like, or might simply bedone by dynamic serving of customized resources suited to the TVCcontext without ever resolving into a more specific URL.

Again, as described above, this process of linking and addition of TVCparameters can be implemented in a variety of ways. For example, an ECportal might obtain state data from manual user entry, from devices inthe home, and/or from a cable or satellite head-end and associatedservices, including VOD or ad servers, as well as through variousinferences. It might operate largely as a conventional Web portal,making little or no direct use of that information except to append theTVC data to URLs it enables users to select, leaving the use of that TVCdata that to the destination server to handle. Such appending might bedone when a page containing links is served, or might involve proxyingand/or redirection after the viewer actuates a link. The TVC parametersare thus available to the remote server, whether a portal, a targetserver, or an intermediate proxy server, or some other server, to use asdesired. This enables an unlimited variety of services that are contextdependent, including, for example transactions, dynamically tailoredresource customization, searching, and the like. In cases where a URLordinarily contains parameters for other purposes, such asnon-viewing-context-specific transactions, searches, or other dynamiccustomization, the TVC parameters might simply be added to thoseordinarily present, such as by appending, or by other coding methodsthat will be apparent to those skilled in the art.

Alternatively, such a service might itself make fuller use of the TVCparameters to present a more context-specific view of availableresources, as described above. In any case, the portal might provide theusual portal functions of providing a selection of links for the user tochoose from, whether in simple lists, in hierarchical directorystructures, in search functions, in rich navigation structures, or anyother suitable manner. It might also provide entry boxes for manualentry of arbitrary links by a user. In all of these cases, an addedfunction is the appending of the TVC parameters to the resultingrequest. In a local implementation using a Web accessory, extendedbrowser, or similar local function, a similar appending of TVCparameters might be done at the viewer's client system, and might beapplicable to any link actuated by the user, or to any defined subset ofsuch links, and/or might be selectively invoked by the user at the timeof link activation. Such a local implementation might involve little orno remote function to provide such TVC-enriched links, and, again, allinterpretation of this context information might be left to the endresource servers to address.

The interpretation of context at the receiving server might be doneusing any of the methods described elsewhere herein. Depending on thespecificity of the parameters, a program might be fully identified, orsome resolution might be needed. In the case of identification bychannel and system, the server might need to map that data against knownscheduling data to determine a program. In the case of ads, this mightalso require application of further parameters from the TVC, incombination with external schedule-based mapping parameters to determinewhat ad was viewed. In the cases of VOD and addressable ads, data fromdistributors might be needed, if specifics were not already coded intothe received TVC.

Related to the portal/TVC services, additional services might beprovided to receiving service operators to assist in these receiveractivities. This might include such services as providing ASP servicesand/or software components, either of which might include richapplication program interfaces (APIs) for control of specific functions.It might also include provision of data services for interpreting TVCparameters and resolving details of program ID, and for obtainingsupplementary information/metadata on programs and ads that might beuseful to enhancing context-relevance, such as, for example, fromprogram schedules and ad tracking data sources. One simple example ofsuch a service might be responsibility for portions of thecontext-handling logic might be shifted from the sender side of the TVChandling to the receiver side of the TVC handling, even if the sameservice provider ultimately does the work. Provision of such servicesand tools might be a further source of revenue to the portal/TVCservice, and such alternative distributions of services might facilitatetracking data collection.

A further alternative along these lines might be one in which the relayof the TVC data was separated from the primary HTTP request, and insteadis obtained in a separate request to a TVC server made by the receiverof the HTTP request. This might be done as a Web services request, suchas using SOAP or any other appropriate protocol. Even in this kind ofembodiment if might be useful to at least include a URL coding,parameter, or other indication to the receiving server that TVCinformation is available with respect to this request.

Also, in such a cases of server to server communications of TVCparameters, the TVC server might use cookies as an alternative way toreceive some or all of the TVC parameters from the viewer's PC, to berelayed to the receiver server via any suitable protocol, such as HTTPor SOAP. It might also be useful to extend the cookie mechanism at thebrowser to allow current TVC data to be inserted into cookies at theclient prior to providing a cookie to a server. Such a mechanism mightalso be generalized into an automatically updating subscription-basednotification service that sends an HTTP and/or SOAP request, with thecookie containing the updated information, to a subscribing serverwhenever relevant state changes occur.

It should also be noted that such methods can readily be extended to thericher embodiments described above. For example, in the case of standingsessions and/or streams of enhancements, the inclusion of TVC parametersmight be provided at the time such a connection is first established.Instead of simply sending an atomic ending resource as the result ofsuch a request, the receiving server might send a response thatestablishes the standing session and/or stream of enhancement dataand/or metadata, using any of the methods previously described, whichmight involve use of protocols specific to continuous flows and/orstreams, and which might be available only on more advancedservers/services oriented to such continuous flows/streams unlike thesimpler and more widely used basic protocols of the Web such as HTTP andSOAP.

Again, in contrast to current two-screen telewebbing services, astandard HTTP and/or SOAP Web request to some URL might have added to itassociated TVC data. That TVC data might be interpreted by the receivingserver and used to send, in response, a Web page that in turnestablishes a standing session associated with the appropriate one ofany of a multiplicity of programs from any of a multiplicity of ECsources. That establishment of a further session might be done usingembedded JavaScript, applets, and/or similar components, as describedpreviously. The protocol example outlined above might also be extendedto provide updated TVC parameters to a server providing such services,so that it might reflect realtime changes as events occur, such aschannel changes or time-shifts, or following the rich details of amulti-program/multi-channel session.

For example, such servers might establish subscriptions with theTVC-provider service, such that all relevant state change events arerelayed in update TVC transmissions. Such a facility might exploitmulticast features for added efficiency. Setup and breakdown of suchsubscriptions might be by explicit handshake, or the protocols mightprovide conventions for session lease, expiration, and renewal based ontime or other defined events. Based on these updates to the TVC data,the associated standing sessions for enhancements might also be endedfor a channel tuned away from and begun for a channel tuned to. Thus itshould be understood that subscription-oriented flows might beestablished bi-directionally, with flows of enhancement data in onedirection, from resource sources to the viewer, and flows of TVC data inthe other, from the viewer to the resource sources.

Additional extensions might support the more advanced state transfers ofmore powerful TV viewing systems, such as those that supportedenhancement sessions on the TV device set, by including parametersrelated to the detailed state of such sessions. Thus arbitrarily richenhancement services providing any or all the features and servicesdescribed herein might be supported by such open protocols, and with thesame kind of flexible division of function between state relayproviders, and state interpreters/responders.

In view of this, it is noted that methods such as this one of adapteduse of standard Web protocols permit services of the kind describedherein to be readily overlaid on the existing Web, such that usefulresults may be obtained from existing servers and resources withoutmodification, but in which enhanced results that more fully respond tothe particular context of TV viewing can be easily added by individualWeb sites to the extent that they so desire. This could be a way tointroduce and develop such enhanced services, by starting immediatelywith TVC-enhanced portal links to a broad array of existing servicesthat might generate traffic, and encouraging the providers of thoseservices to gradually enhance them by using the TVC data that isprovided. The ability to see and measure such actual traffic mightconvincingly demonstrate to content/service providers the opportunity togain value from enhanced context-specific services.

More generally, this ability to layer TVC-related enhancement serviceson top of standard Web protocols can allow for much greater openness andflexibility in the offering of enhancements to TV and other hypermedia,in that any Web resource becomes a candidate enhancement resource.Viewers need not be limited to the set of resources expressly developedas enhancement resources, but can be offered any Web resource, with nonoticeable difference in how TVC-aware and non-TVC-aware resources arerequested. The important differences, which may be largely hidden fromthe viewer, are in the automatic adaptation of TVC-aware resources tothe TV context, and in the ability to have ongoing streams ofenhancements established, automatically. Viewer control and visibilityof the establishment of ongoing enhancement streams can be provided tothe extent desired for good user interface control, but the technologydoes not require any more user awareness than is so desired.

Building further on this separation of TVC-related functions, andlayering on standard Web protocols, these methods enable the provisionof a class of broadly useful TVC servers (TV context servers, or TVCSs),which serve as a specialized kind of context server for a variety ofapplications. As noted, such TVC servers might pass their data in theform of parameters associated with an HTTP or SOAP request, or mightprovide such data in response to separate “back-end” requests after arequest is received by a server. As noted, any Web server might makesuch a TVC request in an effort to customize its action to the TVcontext of the requesting user. It should be noted that this capabilityto make requests to a TVC server might be readily available not just toWeb servers, but to any kind of server. One example of particularinterest is the case of Web ad servers.

It is common practice for Web sites to embed ads indirectly, by codingHTML requests into the pages they serve that cause the receiving browserto make a further request to a designated specialty ad server, and topass parameters with the request that that server can use to serve adsthat are targeted based on known attributes of that user. Theavailability of TVC data adds the possibility of a new level oftargeting, one based on the TVC-specified information on what the useris watching on TV at the moment. This additional context-relatedtargeting might be useful, for example, both in regard to the specificsof the program, and also to the implication of that knowledge withregard to other attributes of the user, such as demographics,psychographics, interests, and the like.

Based on the teachings herein, it will be apparent to one skilled in theart that this TVC data can be provided to such Web servers using minorvariations on any of the methods described, including for exampleappending of TVC parameters when the request is made from the browser,and/or the issuance of subsequent requests from the ad server to the TVCserver, and/or communication between the ad server and the Web serverthat embedded the ad request. This is consistent with earlier discussionon methods for coordinated targeting of TV and Web ads. Simple linkagesmight enable coordination of TV and Web ads with regard to TV viewingstate such as just described. Deeper integration of TV and Web adservers could allow for deep integration of knowledge of the viewer, aswell as sophisticated coordination of the message content of ads acrossboth TV and Web sessions, both at a given time, and over time. Suchdeeply integrated coordination might be found valuable in maximizing thedesired effect of ad campaigns, and provide more coherent and thus lessobjectionable experiences for the viewer. It will be understood that, invarious embodiments, such integration might, for example, be achieved byproviding an integrated ad serving control function that is capable ofdrawing on an integrated base of viewer data and ad content data(including metadata) relevant to both TV and Web viewing in order todrive coordinated serving of custom-assembled ads through both TV adservers and Web servers, and that various alternative distributions ofequivalent information and control functions might also be applied toachieve such an integrated effect.

It will further be understood that TVCs and TVCSs might be integratedwith more general and broadly functional context records and contextservers that support other aspects of a user's context to achievebroader forms of context-awareness. It will also be understood that TVCsand TVCSs might be embodied in object-oriented form, and that the TVCsmight include and/or reference information that is supplementary tostate, such as for example business and/or operational rules, behaviormodels, relationships of viewers, resources, services, actions, and thelike, history, and references to associated data, such as for exampleprogram schedules. Such information, and the software that processes itmight address support for abstraction and inference relating to the TVCand other context data, as well as for synthesis of data that might beassembled from multiple sources, such as from various devices and/orsensors at the viewer location, from head-end and other remote servers,and from manual entry and/or inference.

The methods just described for layering TVC support onto standard Webprotocols can also enable a useful division of labor and responsibility,in that the enhanced linking services simply append the needed TVCinformation, and provide basic linking services, while the more specificinterpretation of context and what ending resources to serve based onthat context is left to the destination Web service to handle as itdesires.

This separation of functions might have a range of important businessand legal benefits, with regard to some of the issues described above,and as noted further in some aspects below. With regard to any possiblerights issues related to enhancement, as outlined above, this separationof function might be useful to isolate the linking and context relayfunctions of the portal service, which might not have any rightsimplications, from the enhancement content selection and presentationfunctions of the EC content servers, which might be affected by rightsissues. These might be operated entirely independently of the portal orlinking services, and thus any rights issues might be restricted to theservers that interpret the context and serve the end resources. TheTVC-related linking services might have no more responsibility forcontent rights than do conventional portal linking services.

It should also be understood that such a separation might also besupportive of multiple independent sources of enhancement channels,independently of the basic TVC linking service. As discussed above, ECproviders might be linked in multiple levels, providing chains ofvalue-added service, and the TVC portal/linking service might serve asthe initial portal or gateway switching service that links the viewer toone or more such chains. Thus, in the general case, a viewer might begiven facilities to specify to the TVC portal/linking service one ormore EC aggregators that it should present in coordination with abrowsing session, and that TVC portal/linking service might then presentTVC-specific links to those services, with further selections of ECresources to be controlled by those aggregator services, based on therelay of TVC data to them.

For example, a portal might be set to present ECs sourced from theprogramming provider of the base program, perhaps along with someadditional EC providers, and the user might then actuate links to thebase programming provider's EC, which then uses the TVC data to activatea standing enhancement session for the duration of that program. Theuser might also select, or directly enter a URL, for an alternate EC,such as from an independent EC provider, which might also receive TVCdata by the same mechanism, and use that data to deliver additionalresources, whether as simple Web pages, or by setting up additionalstanding sessions. Similarly, a viewer might select among alternativeshopping services that might include the primary advertisers for TV adsas they appear, and/or alternative shopping services that might alsocoordinate their offers based on the TVC data relayed by the TVCportal/linking service.

The example of this mechanism also clarifies aspects of third partylinking by independent parties that might serve to enable legalenforcement of service fees and rights related to such links. This mightbe particularly relevant to the embodiments in which TVC parameters wereroutinely passed to linked Web sites. For example, the provision ofstate record data in the TVC parameters, such as might be appended to anHTTP or SOAP request, as described, might be understood as a being avalue-added service provided by the portal, or by the browser or browseraccessory or the like. The provider of such server or software-generatedcontext relay services might seek to charge for the use of thatvalue-added service. In addition to the various legal and technicalmeans for enforcing control of such services already described above, anadditional method might be to simply consider any use of the TVC by areceiving service without payment in accord with defined price schedulesand terms to be a case of theft of service.

Accordingly, the provider of the TVC services might publish a scheduleof fees, and indicate that the TVC is only to be used in accord withthat schedule. The receiving services could then have the choice ofusing the TVC parameters to serve context-related resources, or not. Thereceiving service might be free to respond to the basic URL request inthe usual fashion to serve a generic page, with no obligation, just asfor any conventional request—and as would normally happen with nospecial programming. However, by causing their server to read and usethe TVC parameters to provide a more specific, and presumably morevaluable, response, they might de-facto be considered to be using theTVC service, and thus become liable for payments on the specified terms.This might be much like the case of using a signal from a cable systemfeed that might pass through one's apartment without having asubscription in force. Thus this might enable a simple business modelfor a TVC linkage provider, in which a fee structure is made known, andTVC-enriched links are provided to an open set of resources.

If the TVC parameters are not used, the function might be considered toinvolve no obligation by the receiver to pay for referrals except asmight be explicitly agreed to with the portal. Such agreement mightinclude, for example, options that involve fees for inclusion and/orpreferential positioning of links on portal pages, including the case ofsearch results pages. But if the TVC parameters are used to provideenhanced services that exploit that information, such as to providepages specific to a given program, or time within a program, then feeswould be payable, under threat of legal action for theft of service.

The TVC service provider might exploit this structure by ensuring thatthe URLs linked to are sufficiently generic that they would have somebasic value to users, and thus deliver some utility even withnon-cooperating EC/service providers, but that only if the receivingserver does added processing and/or routing based on the TVC could morespecific and relevant resources be provided to the viewer, thusincreasing the value of the results for all parties. Furtherenhancements to such a business model might provide that some level oflimited usage of such services are free, such as to encourage trial use,and to provide some level of free use for selected services, such asmight be considered pro-bono. Under such a scheme, some degree oflimited use might be permitted, but any use that exploited the TVCparameters to the extent that it resulted in material loss of revenuemight be addressed by legal means.

Alternative methods might be used to encourage compliance by receivingservers, and/or to derive revenue from non-paying services. For example:

-   -   Encryption might be particularly effective as a way to make the        TVC data available only to parties that pay fees as required.        The TVC data might be encrypted or encoded in any suitable        manner, such as using keys that are specific to a receiving URL        and can be changed and not divulged to a receiver that is not in        compliance. In such a case, viewers might continue to gain        limited value from the generic links that might remain        functional, but would lose the benefits of TVC-specific        responses.    -   TVC data might just be omitted from links to non-compliant URLs.    -   Techniques for introducing delays, and/or for introducing ads,        such as interstitials, might be used when passing on links to        resources that are not paying. This might generate compensatory        revenue, and also motivate receiving services to upgrade to paid        service, and such actions might be well accepted by users as        proper attempts to gain fair compensation.

In embodiments in which the TVC data is specifically requested by thelinked server, control might be readily achieved with similar methods,as well as by using passwords, authentication, and/or similar methods tocontrol access, as will be apparent to one skilled in the art.

It will be understood that variations on this approach for defining aservice that is taken up at the option of a content/service and/or ECprovider could, in various embodiments, be equally applicable to otherembodiments of the methods described herein, as well as to other kindsof services. Thus, this offers a broadly applicable method for providingopen matching of service requesters and service providers, in a way thatenables some limited exchange with all such services, but restricts morevaluable exchanges to those that use the value-added parameters, orother similar value added data and/or metadata, and thus become liablefor corresponding service fees.

It will be further understood that usage monitoring and accounting oflinks passed to edge servers might be done in various ways. Forinstance, remote portal based services might use redirection and/orproxying to record all requests passed to all URLs. Similarly, localclient services that provide context-enriched link handling might alsocause such events to be tracked through a remote server, oralternatively, might separately report such activity to a designatedservice, whether in real time, or on some periodic batch reportingcycle. The resulting traffic data might then be analyzed to determinewhat fees are owed with regard to what URLs. In the case of requestsmade from a Web server to a TVC server, usage accounting data might beobtained directly by the TVC server.

It is also noted that portals of the kind described herein might alsoprovide services as an infomediary agent for viewers. Such servicesmight involve using personal data on attributes, preferences, andbehavior such as described previously, and selectively providing subsetsand/or derivations of such data to EC and similar service providers.Such services might facilitate obtaining content and services mostrelevant to the viewing context, and to other characteristics of theuser, while operating under defined policies that protect the viewer'sdata from disclosure except as desired.

Such disclosures may be negotiated based on both user and serviceprovider-specified policies, using schemes similar to those provided forby the Platform for Privacy Preferences (P3P). Such information might beincluded in the TVC demographic and/or user parameters, or in similarextended parameters. Again, the use of such services might be at theoption of the receiver, with fees owing if and only if the data is used,or under some other agreed terms. More generally, it will be understoodthat the entire spectrum of linking and context coordination servicesdescribed herein can be structured in a variety of ways, such as toserve as ASP and/or local services primarily controlled by the user,and/or ASP and/or local services primarily controlled by the receivingservice providers, and/or services of an independent operator, and/orany desired combination thereof.

In considering the methods for exploiting synchronicity describedherein, some generalizations may be useful. The very term “program”might be viewed as indicative of the fact that some kinds of content,typically continuous media content, involve the user in the play of aprogram over time, and thus impart a level of “activity programming” tothe user's browsing experience. Such a program is typically defined bysomeone other than the viewer, but even a replay of a program created bythe viewer, himself, might still impart an high level of programming.The browsing experience might be expected to follow this continuingactivity program until some event causes a break or branch or otherdiscontinuity in that program. Knowledge of this program thus mightenable prediction of the user's ensuing activity program, and knowledgeof the program discontinuity events might enable recognition of a lossof program-based synchronicity and a need to attempt to re-establish itby whatever means might be available.

Thus, any coordination of activities based on this broad synchronicitymight be divided into epochs of 1) following a program in some level ofsynchronicity, alternating with 2) epochs of discontinuity and seekingnew identifications of subsequent activity programs that might befollowed to reestablish a subsequent epoch of synchronicity. The methodsdescribed might be viewed as being oriented to these epochs of“punctuated synchronicity,” with groups of methods as follows:

-   -   methods for ongoing monitoring for events that signal a        discontinuity, such as program-based branching triggers, user        session transfer requests, other user or external actions, and        the like    -   methods used while operating in periods of some level of        program-based synchronicity, such as those described for        following programs, such as to coordinate programmed actions,        and the like    -   methods used while operating at times of discontinuity as        signaled by such events, such as for seeking information needed        to establish/reestablish synchronicity, and then using that        information to (re/) establish an appropriate level of        synchronicity and coordination with a subsequent program, and        the like.

It is noted that similar methods might be applied to a wide range ofsimilar activities, such as, for example, in other tasks that involvecontext awareness and/or task coordination in which some aspects of thecontext and/or task may involve specifiable activity programs. Suchtasks might include physical navigation support tasks and support ofknowledge work that includes program-driven activities, including anyform of specified steps and/or sequences. For example, a location-basedservice might exploit knowledge of defined trip segments to select setsof support services, and schedule them based on predicted and/orconfirmed time/location checkpoints, and to monitor for the end of adefined segment or a departure from plan. Similar methods and portalservices structures might be applied to such services.

It is similarly noted that the methods described for communicating TVCdata to any standard Web service using HTTP and/or SOAP might also beapplied to any other kind of context data, conveyed as a context recordin association with a standard Web request, whether provided with therequest, or subsequently requested of a context server. Again, suchmethods enable the seamless intermixing of context-aware services withina broader selection of services on the open Web that might not havecontext-aware capabilities, and might simply ignore any context recordthat might be supplied, and respond in their usual way. These methodsmight be useful, for instance, for any kind of dynamic contextinformation, so that a single context server can monitor it, and make itavailable to any service that needs it.

Although the invention has been described in detail in the foregoingembodiments, it is to be understood that the descriptions have beenprovided for purposes of illustration only and that other variationsboth in form and detail can be made thereupon by those skilled in theart without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, whichis defined solely by the appended claims. In describing a variety offeatures usable by viewers, programmers, distributors, advertisers andother parties in the context to a variety of exemplary configurationsand applications, it is intended that all combinations of such featuresand methods are understood to be generally applicable, with minorvariations, to all such configurations and applications, and theexplicit description of all such combinations is omitted merely to avoidrepetition. Each of the above-noted references is incorporated herein byreference in its entirety. It is further noted that section headingscontained herein should not be deemed to govern, limit, modify, or inany manner affect the scope, meaning, or intent of the content of anysection, as such sections may include material of different or broaderscope.

APPENDIX A Typical modes of coordination Display Set Options Display setoptions Interaction Element TV picture PC/PDA screen 1. Main videoprogram Main screen Duplicate main screen screen Different main screen2. Additional video PIP Standard PIP view Duplicate PIP screen screenMask out (omit) PIP Only PIP screen Reverse main/PIP 3. ITV bugs andcues Show on main screen Duplicate Show on PIP Show here only Mask outShow different options 4. ITV browser screen Show on main screenDuplicate (or independent Web Show on PIP Show here only page) . . . orother Mask out Show different options “computer” screen More optionssuch as e-mail, chat, etc. Different people 5. Video window within Showon main screen Duplicate browser screen Show on PIP Show here only Maskout Show different options . . . 6. Interactive image Show on mainscreen Duplicate hot-spots Mask out Show here only Show differentoptions . . . Control Options Control options Interaction Element TVremote control PC/PDA controls 1-6 (any or all) Controls both devicesControls both devices Controls TV only Controls PC only Migrates ITVMigrates PC interactions interactions to PC (screen and state) back toTV Direct signal sources Direct signal sources Interaction Element TVpicture PC/PDA screen 1-6 (any or all) Broadcast Broadcast IP stream IPstream Stored Stored Signal relay Signal relay Interaction Element PC toTV TV to PC 1-6 (any or all) Broadcast signal Broadcast signal A/V or RFsignal A/V or RF signal IP stream IP stream Via head-end Via head-end

1. A method for receiving hyperlinks for interactive television,comprising: submitting to a linkbase provider a request for one or morehyperlinks, said request including interactive television stateinformation corresponding to a particular device; and receiving fromsaid provider a response to said request, the provider's formulation ofsaid response comprising consulting a linkbase correlating stateinformation with hyperlinks, wherein requests relating to any ofmultiple programs are submitted, said requests differing only withregard to said state information. 2-164. (canceled)
 165. A method foruse in a second computerized device set which is configured for wirelesscommunication using a wireless communications protocol that enableswireless communication with a first computerized device set, wherein thefirst and second computerized device sets include respective first andsecond continuous media players, the method comprising: making availableto a user a first user interface that allows the user to select, usingan input means associated with the second computerized device set, acontinuous media content to be presented to the user, wherein thecontinuous media content includes a set of encoded video data; makingavailable to the user a second user interface that allows the user toselect, using the input means, whether to have the continuous mediacontent presented on either one or both of the first computerized deviceset and the second computerized device set; wherein, in the event theuser selects, via the second user interface, to have the continuousmedia content presented on the second computerized device set, thesecond media player decoding the continuous media content forpresentation on the second computerized device set; and, wherein, in theevent the user selects, via the second user interface, to have thecontinuous media content presented on the first computerized device set,wirelessly transmitting, in accordance with a wireless local areanetwork protocol, at least a URL or URI from the second computerizeddevice set to the first computerized device set, wherein the URL or URIfacilitates obtaining the continuous media content by the first mediaplayer for presentation to the user on the first computerized deviceset.
 166. The method of claim 165, further comprising: receivingdiscovery information at the second computerized device set inaccordance with a device management discovery protocol that isimplemented at a communication layer above an internet protocol layer,and wherein the discovery information allows the second computerizeddevice set to determine that the first computerized device set iscapable of receiving the continuous media content and playing thecontinuous media content.